Article Sidebar

Download
Full text PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1038 Download : 889

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The complexity of public services require auditors to perform audit judgments to ensure the quality of information and to evaluate the evidence presented in financial statements. Thus, the auditors’ judgment and technical skills are important factors in audit quality. This study examines how auditor independence, task complexity, auditor experience, and professional skepticism affect auditor judgment. Purposive sampling was employed to select auditors who worked at the Supreme Audit Institution (BPK-RI) of Papua Province. The data were collected using a set of a questionnaire consisting of 30 items measured on a Likert scale, distributed directly and via Google Forms. The data analyzes using multiple linear regression. The result presents empirical evidence that auditor experience and professional skepticism partially affected audit judgment, whereas task complexity and auditor independence did not have a partial effect on audit judgment. The study provides relevant and adequate insights to government external auditors regarding the factors that should be taken into consideration in maintaining and improving their audit judgments to bring optimal benefits for the local government stakeholders.

Keywords

Task complexity auditor experience independence professional skepticism audit judgment

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Sumartono Sumartono, Yana Ermawati, Tania Meliana Rorong

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

  1. Agustini, N. K. R., & Merkusiwati, N. K. L. A. (2016). Pengaruh tekanan ketaatan, senioritas auditor dan tekanan anggaran waktu terhadap audit judgment. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana, 15(1), 433–462.
  2. Alamri, F., Nangoi, G. B., & Tinangon, J. (2017). Pengaruh keahlian, pengalaman, kompleksitas tugas dan independensi terhadap audit judgement auditor internal pada Inspektorat Provinsi Gorontalo. Jurnal EMBA. Universitas Sam Ratulangi, 5(2), 593–601.
  3. Azizah, N. D. J., & Pratono, R. (2020). Pengaruh locus of control, independensi, kompleksitas tugas, dan gender terhadap audit judgement (studi empiris pada Kantor Akuntan Publik di Surabaya). Liability, 02(1), 106–126.
  4. Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. (2017). Standar Pemeriksaan Keuangan Negara, Nomor 1 Tahun 2017.
  5. Bahri, R. F. (2018). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi audit judgment (pada KAP di Kota Surakarta, Semarang dan Yogyakarta). Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 10(2), 1–15.
  6. Ceposonline. (2020). BPK Sebut 8 Kabupaten yang Raport Merah. Ceposonline.Com. https://www.ceposonline.com/2020/02/27/bpk-sebut-8-kabupaten-yang-raport-merah/
  7. Dhiyatmika, G. W., & Latrini, M. Y. (2020). The effect of gender and audit experience on audit judgement (case study of BPK RI Province Bali). American Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research (AJHSSR), 4(8), 249–252.
  8. Ghozali, I. (2018). Aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS 25 (Edisi 9). Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
  9. Ginting, W. A., & Munawarah. (2019). Analisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi audit judgement. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, 2(1), 31–40.
  10. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  11. Ismunawan, & Triyanto, E. (2020). Faktor-faktor penentu audit judgement pada kantor akuntan publik (KAP di Surakarta dan Yogyakarta). Jurnal Akuntansi dan Pajak, 20(2), 224–229. https://doi.org/10.29040/jap.v20i2.722
  12. Jamilah, S., Fanani, Z., & Chandrarin, G. (2007). Pengaruh gender, tekanan ketaatan, dan kompleksitas tugas terhadap audit judgment. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi 10, 1–30.
  13. Jayanti, D. (2017). Pengaruh independensi, pengalaman, kompleksitas tugas, tekanan ketaatan dan etika auditor terhadap judgement (studi empiris pada Kantor Inspektorat Se-Eks Karesidenan Surakarta). Jurnal Akuntansi, 1(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.758
  14. Kadous, K., & Zhou, Y. (Daniel). (2019). How does intrinsic motivation improve auditor judgment in complex audit tasks? Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(1), 108–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12431
  15. Korompis, C. W. M., & Latjandu, L. D. (2017). Pengaruh narsisme klien, audit fee, independensi, skeptisme profesional, dan interlock auditor eksternal terhadap audit judgement dalam pendeteksian kecurangan laporan keuangan (studi kasus pada KAP di Manado). Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Going Concern, 12(2), 594–604.
  16. Libby, R., & Luft, J. (1993). Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: Ability, knowledge, motivation, and environment. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18(5), 425–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(93)90040-D
  17. Monica, A. N. (2018). Pengaruh self efficacy, locus of control, pengalaman auditor dan skeptisisme profesional terhadap audit judgement (studi kasus di Kantor Akuntan Publik Surakarta dan Semarang). Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 10(2), 1–15.
  18. Murtadha, I. A. (2018). Pengaruh gender, anggaran waktu dan pengalaman auditor terhadap audit judgement (studi empiris pada kantor akuntan publik (KAP) dan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK) di Sumatra Barat). E-Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis, 1, 1–19.
  19. Muslim., Pelu, M. F. A.R., & Mentari, K.S. (2018). Pengaruh kompetensi auditor, tekanan ketaatan, dan kompleksitas tugas terhadap audit judgment. Bongaya Journal for Research in Accounting (BJRA), 1(2), 8–17.
  20. Muttiwijaya, G. T. P., & Ariyanto, D. (2019). Pengaruh self efficacy, skeptisisme profesional, independensi, dan kompleksitas tugas terhadap audit judgment. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana, 27(2), 1290–1315.
  21. Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  22. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 8. (2006). Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 8 Tahun 2006 tentang Pelaporan keuangan dan kinerja instansi pemerintah.
  23. Pratiwi, W., & Pratiwi, D. N. (2020). Pengaruh pengalaman auditor, independensi auditor, dan skeptisme profesional terhadap audit judgement. Jurnal Kajian Akuntansi Dan Bisnis Terkini, 1(2), 239–253.
  24. Rahmadanty, N. E., & Muslimin. (2020). Pengaruh pengalaman auditor, kompetensi profesional, dan kompleksitas tugas terhadap audit judgment (studi pada Kantor Akuntan Publik di Kota Surabaya). Behavior Accounting Journal (BAJ), 3(1), 73–89.
  25. Sari, I. P. (2016). Pengaruh gender, tekanan ketaatan, kompleksitas tugas, pengalaman auditor, pengetahuan auditor dan kompleksitas dokumen audit terhadap audit judgement (studi empiris pada Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan RI Pusat). JOM Fekon, 3(1), 2008–2022.
  26. Sari, N. P. S., & Budiartha, K. (2018). Self-efficacy memoderasi kompleksitas tugas, tekanan anggaran waktu, independensi terhadap audit judgment BPK RI Provinsi Bali. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana, 23(1), 267–295.
  27. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business a skill-building approach. In Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research (Seventh). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_102084
  28. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik (SPAP) SA seksi 315.23, (2013). Pengindentifikasian dan Penilaian Risiko kesalahan penyajian material melalui pemahamanan atas entitas dan lingkungannya.
  29. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik (SPAP) SA Nomori 220, (2017). Pengendalian mutu untuk audit atas laporan keuangan.
  30. Sumartono., Pasolo, M. R., & Nugraha, K. (2019). Studi empiris kualitas audit internal pemerintah: melalui batasan waktu audit dan skeptisme profesional. Journal of Business Administration, 3(2), 245–257.
  31. Sumartono, S. (2022). Professional skepticism in moderating the influences of auditors’ knowledge, obedience pressure, and auditors’ experience on audit judgment. Jurnal Aset (Akuntansi Riset), 14(1), 130–139. https://doi.org/10.17509/jaset.v14i1.44580
  32. Surbakti, M. A., & Wijayanti, N. A. (2022). Konflik peran dan pengalaman audit dalam mempengaruhi audit judgment dengan skeptisisme profesional sebagai variabel mediasi. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 32(3), 562–579. https://doi.org/10.24843/EJA.2022.v 32.i03.p01
  33. Susandya, A. A. P. G. B. A. (2020). Perilaku auditor dan lingkungannya terhadap audit judgement. Jurnal Benefita, 5(2), 295–307.
  34. Undang-undang No. 15. (2016). Undang-undang No. 15 tahun 2016 tentang Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan.
  35. Wahyuni, W., Sudradjat, & Jasmadeti. (2020). Analysis of factors affecting audit judgment on auditors (a case study at the audit board of the Republic of Indonesia BPK RI ). Jurnal Aplikasi Ekonomi Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 2(1), 167–180.
  36. Yowanda, V., Kristina, V., Pernando, R., Sherly, S., Erika, E., Sitepu, W. R. B., & Dinarianti, R. (2019). Pengaruh skeptisme, pengalaman auditor, dan self efficacy terhadap audit judgement pada Kantor Akuntan Publik di Medan. Jurnal Ilmiah ESAI, 13(2), 124–140.
  37. Yuliyana, S., & Waluyo, I. (2018). The effect of framing and auditor independence on the audit judgment. Jurnal Nominal, VII(2), 33–46.