Main Article Content


The purpose of this study is to examine whether or not there is a difference in the decision-making of external auditors in determining the level of audit materiality between participants who get good news followed by bad news and those who get bad news information sequences (bad news) followed by good news (good news) with a step-by-step and end-of-sequence information presentation pattern in the positive frame or negative frame. The research method used in the research is the mixed design experiment method (between and within the subject) which manipulates the independent variables of the order of evidence (good news followed by bad news and bad news followed by good news) and framing effect (positive frame or negative frame) in the presentation pattern Step by Step and End of Sequence. Participants in this study were 150 students of the Bachelor of Accounting study program at Hayam Wuruk Perbanas Surabaya University with 300 experiment data. This study uses the normality test and the Kruskall-Wallis H test. The results of this study indicate that the Step-by-step presentation pattern can cause a recency effect when receiving information with a sequence of evidence of good news followed by bad news and bad news followed by good news both in the series, with the positive or negative frame, and the results obtained if the information is presented with an End of Sequence presentation pattern with information and a sequence of evidence of good news followed by bad news or bad news followed by good news there is no difference (no order effect) either in the framing effect (positive frame and negative frame).


Belief-adjustment model framing effect step by step end of sequence audit materiality level decisions

Article Details


  1. Alardi, M. W., & Altass, S. M. O. (2022). The role of materiality guidance in rationalizing professional judgments associated with materiality decisions. European Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Research, 10(1), 71-112.
  2. Almilia, L. S., & Supriyadi, N. A. (2013). Examining belief adjustment model on investment decision making. International Journal of Economics and Accounting, 4(2), 169.
  3. Almilia, L. S., Wulanditya, P., & Nita, R. A. (2020). Framing effect and belief adjustment model in investment judgment. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 10(3), 509–524.
  4. Anggraeni, A., & Almilia, L. S. (2017). Model belief adjustment dalam pengambilan keputusan investasi berdasarkan informasi nonakuntansi. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 20(1), 149.
  5. Ayunanda, T. I., & Utami, I. (2015). Model revisi keyakinan dan keputusan audit: Suatu pengujian eksperimental. 210 Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia, 12(2), 210–224.
  6. Christensen, B. E., Eilifsen, A., Glover, S. M., & Messier Jr, W. F. (2020). The effect of audit materiality disclosures on investors’ decision making. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 87, 101168.
  7. David, R., & Abeysekera, I. (2021). Auditor judgments after withdrawal of the materiality accounting standard in Australia. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 14(6), 268.
  8. DeZoort, F. T., Holt, T. P., & Stanley, J. D. (2019). A comparative analysis of investor and auditor materiality judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 38(3), 149-166.
  9. Eilifsen, A., Hamilton, E. L., & Messier Jr, W. F. (2021). The importance of quantifying uncertainty: Examining the effects of quantitative sensitivity analysis and audit materiality disclosures on investors’ judgments and decisions. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 90, 101169.
  10. Fehrenbacher, D., Roetzel, P. G., & Pedell, B. (2018). The influence of culture and framing on investment decision-making: The case of Vietnam and Germany. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 25(4), 763–780.
  11. Hadi, M. Z. M., Almilia, L. S., & Nita, R. A. (2019). Information presentation pattern, information order, and framing effect in taking investment decisions. The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research, 22(03).
  12. Hanafi, T. (2018). The testing of belief-adjustment model and framing effect on non-professional investor’s investment decision-making. The Indonesian Accounting Review, 7(1), 1.
  13. Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 1–55.
  14. Koonce, L., Lipe, M. G., & McAnally, M. L. (2005). Judging the risk of financial instruments: Problems and potential remedies. Accounting Review, 80(3), 871–895.
  15. Nisa, A. K. (2017). Belief adjustment model test in investment decision making: experimentation of short information series. The Indonesian Accounting Review, 7(1), 15.
  16. Sugiyono. (2015). Metode penelitian kuantitatif kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.