Exploring How Professional Skepticism Mediates the Impact of Ethics and Audit Risk on Opinion Accuracy

Trinandari Prasetya Nugrahanti, Agus Salim, Djoko Hanantijo, Primadonna Ratna

Abstract

This study investigates the dynamic interplay among audit risk, auditor ethics, and audit opinion accuracy, emphasizing professional skepticism as a crucial mediating construct. The primary aim is to examine how audit risk and auditor ethics influence audit opinion accuracy by elucidating the role of professional skepticism as an intervening behavioral mechanism. Consequently, the study addresses a central research question regarding the behavioral pathways that shape audit judgment accuracy. Using a quantitative, questionnaire-based design, data were collected from 101 auditors at public accounting firms in DKI Jakarta, Indonesia, via convenience sampling and analyzed through Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The empirical results indicate that both audit risk and auditor ethics significantly enhance audit opinion accuracy. Professional skepticism independently improves judgment quality and serves as a significant mediator between auditor ethics and audit opinion accuracy, whereas the effect of audit risk remains direct and unmediated. The study’s novelty, grounded in agency theory, reconceptualizes professional skepticism as a dynamic mechanism linking ethics to outcomes, advancing behavioral auditing beyond traditional direct-effects models. Practically, audit firms should reinforce ethical frameworks, training programs, and quality control systems that explicitly cultivate professional skepticism. Regulators and professional bodies are encouraged to integrate behavioral auditing and skeptical judgment into auditor education to further enhance audit quality.

 

Keywords: Professional Skepticism; Auditor Ethics; Audit Risk; Audit Opinion Accuracy; Audit Quality.

 

DOI https://doi.org/10.55463/issn.1674-2974.53.1.3


Full Text:

PDF


References


Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., Beasley, M. S., & Hogan, C. E. Auditing and Assurance Services: An Integrated Approach (Global Edition). Pearson Education Limited. 2023.

Kartika, M. R., Fitriana, F., & Yuliaty⁠. Ethics, education level, and professional skepticism on audit quality. Jrak, 2021, 13(1), 32-36. DOI:https://doi.org/10.23969/jrak.v13i1.3814

Institut Akuntan Publik Indonesia (IAPI). Kode Etik Profesi Akuntan Publik. Jakarta: Salemba Empat. 2021.

Institut Akuntan Publik Indonesia (IAPI). Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik (SPAP). Jakarta: Salemba Empat. 2022.

Zakaria, A., Khumaira, A. R. A. C., Utaminingtyas, T. H., Purwohedi, U., & Indriani, S. Accuracy In Giving an Audit Opinion: Government Internal Auditors' Perspectives. Quality-Access to Success, 2021, 22(184), 40-48.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/22.184.05

Zakaria, Z., Mustapha, I., & Abdul Rahman, A. Enhancing audit opinion accuracy through professional skepticism and ethical standards. International Journal of Accounting and Finance, 2021, 6(2), 45-58. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1504/IJAF.2021.114598

Farida, F. The effect of auditor ethics, auditor experience, and independence on audit quality through professional skepticism. Atestasi: Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, 2021, 4(2), 446-463. DOI:https://doi.org/10.57178/atestasi.v4i2.717

Sonjaya, Y. The influence of corporate culture on audit practices and ethics. Golden Ratio of Auditing Research, 2024, 4(2), 107-124. DOI:https://doi.org/10.52970/grar.v4i2.394

Khan, M. J. and Oczkowski, E. The link between trait and state professional skepticism: a review of the literature and a meta‐regression analysis. International Journal of Auditing, 2021, 25(2), 558-581. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12232

Noegroho, Y. A. K., Tinungki, G. M., Hartono, P. G., & Matitaputty, J. S. Personality, cognitive style, and auditors’ professional skepticism. Review of Behavioral Finance, 2025, 17(5), 938-959. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/rbf-04-2025-0131

Sirajuddin, B. and Anggraini, T. P. The effect of professional skepticism, expertise, audit fee, and audit risk on the auditor’s opinion with client preference as a moderator. Muhammadiyah International Journal of Economics and Business, 2019, 2(1), 21-33. DOI:https://doi.org/10.23917/mijeb.v2i1.9378

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 1976, 3(4), 305-360. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Febriansyah, A. and Oktaviana, R. R. The effect of due professional care and audit evidence on the appropriateness of giving an audit opinion. Proceedings of International Conference on Business, Economics, Social Sciences, and Humanities, 2023, 5, 732-739. DOI:https://doi.org/10.34010/icobest.v3i.207

Calderon, T. G., and Gao, L. Cybersecurity risks disclosure and implied audit risks: evidence from audit fees. International Journal of Auditing, 2020, 25(1), 24-39. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12209

Grosu, M. and Mihalciuc, C. C. Audit risk assessment and influence on the auditor`s opinion. Audit Financiar, 2021, 19(163), 528-543. DOI:https://doi.org/10.20869/auditf/2021/163/017

Jalil, F. Y., Meinarsih, T., Widyantini, D., & Andi, A. Factors affecting audit opinions in companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Oikonomia: Journal of Management Economics and Accounting, 2025, 2(2), 84-94. https://doi.org/10.61942/oikonomia.v2i2.306

Hegazy, M. and Salama, S. Effects of qualitative factors and auditors’ personal characteristics on materiality judgments. Managerial Auditing Journal, 2022, 37(3), 305-335. https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-08-2019-2379

Ramdani, A. Audit quality: the impact of expertise, independence and ethics of professional accountants, a cross-sectional study. Jurnal Ekonomi, Bisnis & Entrepreneurship, 2021, 15(1), 24-34. DOI:https://doi.org/10.55208/jebe.v15i1.219

Syahputra, B. E., Irawati, A. E., Afnan, A., & Ceisari, B. B. Determinant Factors Affecting on Accuracy of Auditor’s Opinion: Multigroup Analysis. International Journal of Business, Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (IJBHES), 2020, 2(1), 36-43. DOI:https://doi.org/10.46923/ijbhes.v2i1.65

Ramanda, U. U. The effect of professional skepticism, ethics, and competence on the accuracy of giving an audit opinion. Berkala Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia, 2022, 7(1), 95-112. DOI:https://doi.org/10.20473/baki.v7i1.31908

Doloksaribu, T. A. and Firdaus, R. The role of audit risk in improving audit quality. International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science, 2023, 4(5), 1606-1618. DOI:https://doi.org/10.38142/ijesss.v4i5.875

Hamshari, Y. M., Ali, H. Y., & Alqam, M. A. The relationship of professional skepticism to the risks of auditing and internal control, and the discovery of fraud and core errors in the financial statements in Jordan. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2021, 10(2), 105. DOI:https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0042

Akbar, A., Ermawati, Y., Suratini, S., Pasolo, F., & Sutisman, E. The effect of audit risk and workload on fraud detection through auditor professional skepticism. Atestasi : Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, 2022, 5(2), 567-581. DOI:https://doi.org/10.57178/atestasi.v5i2.355

Galhardo, J. A. G. Intuition in an auditor's professional skepticism. Revista da CGU, 2023, 15(28). DOI:https://doi.org/10.36428/revistadacgu.v15i28.636

Lannai, D., Hajering, H., & Ahmad, H. Audit quality model moderated by professional skepticism: determinants of professional ethics and auditor experience. Theoretical and Practical Research in Economic Fields, 2025, 16(1), 221. DOI:https://doi.org/10.14505/tpref.v16.1(33).18

Aulia, R., Maulana, A., & Supriadi, T. Influence of integrity, independence, professional skepticism, and audit situation on audit opinion. Jurnal Tata Kelola Dan Akuntabilitas Keuangan Negara, 2024, 10(1), 55-66. DOI:https://doi.org/10.28986/jtaken.v10i1.1626

Nugrahanti, T. P., & Jahja, A. S. Audit Judgment Performance: The Effect of Performance Incentives, Obedience Pressures and Ethical Perceptions. Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management, 2018, 6(3), 225–234. https://www.lhscientificpublishing.com/journals/articles/DOI10.5890-JEAM.2018.09.004.aspx

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications. 2024. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506356042

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2019, 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

Nugrahanti, T. P., Lysandra, S., & Ashari, H. Auditor Work Environment and Professional Judgment in Audit: Evidence from Indonesia. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 2024, 18(4). DOI:https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v18i4.1

Ratna, T. D. and Anisykurlillah, I. The effect of experience, independence, and gender on auditor professional scepticism with professional ethics as a moderating. Accounting Analysis Journal, 2020, 9(2), 138-145. https://doi.org/10.15294/aaj.v9i2.25629

Martinov‐Bennie, N., Dyball, M. C., & Tweedie, D. Professional skepticism through audit praxis: an Aristotelian perspective. International Journal of Auditing, 2022, 26(2), 193-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12258


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.