APAKAH ANCHORING-ADJUSTMENT HEURISTIC DAN DISKUSI TIM AUDIT MEMPENGARUHI PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT AUDITOR?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26418/jaakfe.v14i1.78890Keywords:
anchoring-adjustment heuristic, diskusi tim audit, professional judgment, auditor, bukti audit.Abstract
Penelitian ini meneliti pengaruh anchoring-adjustment heuristic dan diskusi tim audit terhadap penilaian risiko audit dalam evaluasi bukti audit. Auditor sering kali menggunakan heuristik, strategi penyederhanaan, dalam membuat keputusan di tengah ketidakpastian. Diskusi tim audit dapat mempengaruhi proses penilaian risiko dengan pertukaran informasi dan opini. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode eksperimental metode Two Way ANAVA dengan desain faktorial 2x2, dengan menggunakan 40 junior auditor dari Kantor Akuntan Publik di Kota Bandung sebagai sampel penelitian. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa anchoring-adjustment heuristic dan diskusi tim audit memiliki pengaruh signifikan terhadap penilaian risiko audit meskipun tidak ada interaksi signifikan antara kedua faktor tersebut. Responden yang tidak mendapatkan faktor anchoring-adjustment heuristic tetapi melakukan diskusi tim audit memiliki penilaian risiko audit yang sama dengan yang tidak melakukan diskusi. Namun, responden yang tidak mendapatkan faktor anchoring-adjustment heuristic dan tidak melakukan diskusi tim audit memiliki penilaian yang berbeda daripada yang mendapatkan faktor anchoring-adjustment heuristic. Penelitian ini memberikan kontribusi untuk pemahaman tentang faktor-faktor psikologis yang memengaruhi penilaian risiko audit, serta implikasinya terhadap evaluasi bukti audit.
This study examines the influence of the anchoring-adjustment heuristic and audit team discussions on audit risk assessment in evaluating audit evidence. Auditors often use heuristics and simplification strategies in making decisions under uncertainty. Audit team discussions can influence the risk assessment by exchanging information and opinions. This study uses the experimental method of Two Way ANOVA method with a 2x2 factorial design, using 40 junior auditors from Public Accounting Firms in Bandung City as the research sample. The results show that the anchoring-adjustment heuristic and audit team discussion significantly influence audit risk assessment, although there is no significant interaction between the two factors. Respondents who did not get the anchoring-adjustment heuristic factor but conducted audit team discussions had the same audit risk assessment as those who did not conduct discussions. However, respondents who did not receive the anchoring-adjustment heuristic and did not have audit team discussions had different assessments than those who received the anchoring-adjustment heuristic. This research contributes to the understanding of the psychological factors that influence audit risk assessment and the implications for evaluating audit evidence.
References
Apriwandi, A., & Christine, D. (2023). Pengaruh Skeptisme Profesional, Integritas Dan Beban Kerja Terhadap Penilaian Risiko Kecurangan. Owner, 7(4), 3560–3568. https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v7i4.1659
Bonner, S. E., & Lewis, B. L. (1990). Determinants of Auditor Expertise. In Studies on Judgment Issues in Accounting and Auditing (Vol. 28).
Chen, W., Khalifa, A. S., Morgan, K. L., & Trotman, K. T. (2018). The effect of brainstorming guidelines on individual auditors’ identification of potential frauds. Australian Journal of Management, 43(2), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896217728560
Cossette, P. (2014). Heuristics and cognitive biases in entrepreneurs: a review of the research. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 27(5), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2015.1105732
Edy, S. A., Said, D., & Nirwana. (2021). The Effect of Red Flags, Competence, and Brainstorming on Fraud Detection with Auditor Professional Skepticism as Moderating Variable. In International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (Vol. 6, Issue 3). www.ijisrt.com646
Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346
Henrizi, P., Himmelsbach, D., & Hunziker, S. (2020). Anchoring and adjustment effects on audit judgments: experimental evidence from Switzerland. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 22(4), 598–621. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-01-2020-0011
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW ON THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PREDICTION 1.
Krida, A., & Pontjoharyo, W. (2023). Are Auditors Biased? The Effect of Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristics on Auditors’ Judgment: Evidence from Auditors in Surabaya.
Laksana, A. C., & Achmad, T. (2020). PENGARUH KUALITAS FRAUD BRAINSTORMING SESSIONS TERHADAP KEMAMPUAN AUDITOR DALAM MENDETEKSI FRAUD DI LAPORAN KEUANGAN (Studi Empiris pada KAP di Semarang). DIPONEGORO JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING, 9(4), 1–13. http://ejournal-s1.undip.ac.id/index.php/accounting
Maradona, A. F. (2020). A Qualitative Exploration of Heuristics and Cognitive Biases in Auditor Judgements. ACCOUNTABILITY, 9(2), 94. https://doi.org/10.32400/ja.30634.9.2.2020.94-112
Phakiti, A. (2015). Experimental Research Methods in Language Learning. Bloomsbury Academic.
Sin, F. Y., Moroney, R., & Strydom, M. (2015). Principles-Based versus Rules-Based Auditing Standards: The Effect of the Transition from AS2 to AS5. International Journal of Auditing, 19(3), 282–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12045
Şişmanoğlu, E., & Arıkboğa, D. (2018). The Factors Affecting Using Professional Judgment in Independent Auditing: Evidences from Turkey. In Contemporary Research in Economics and Social Sciences (Vol. 2, Issue 2).
Standar Audit 240 (SA). (2021). Tanggung Jawab Auditor Terkait Dengan Kecurangana Dalam Suatu Audit Atas Laporan Keuangan. Https://Drive.Google.Com/File/d/1Mu7G3lojdXhe78U-J702Yrv9t_2x90bd/Preview.
Tanoe, J., & Harindahyani, S. (2018). The impact of heuristics and biases in the application of professional judgment by internal auditors in the stage of fieldwork. Advances in Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 186.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. In New Series (Vol. 185, Issue 4157).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Eissa Ainun Najwa, R. Nelly Nur Apandi, Aristanti Widyaningsih
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright Statement and Author Agreemenet can be downloaded here
