Design a Model for Auditor's Professional Judgment

Document Type : Research Paper


1 , Ph.D., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.


Objective: Considering the importance of the issue of professional judgment in auditing, the purpose of this study is to design a model for auditor's professional judgment, considering the environmental characteristics, attributes and conditions surrounding the audit profession in Iran.
Methods: This researchused a qualitative research method and a grounded theory approach. By reviewing the opinions of 18 experts in the audit profession, the factors affecting the professional judgment of the auditors were examined and, finally, the "integrated model of professional judgment," including the causal conditions, intermediary factors and the context, as well as strategies related to professional judgment and their implications are presented. The results of the research led to the formation of a paradigmatic model of research.
Results: The model resulted in the identification of 13 categories of causal conditions, 5 categories of phenomena/context, 8 categories of intervening conditions, 4 categories of action strategies and 5 categories of consequences related to the main phenomenon of research (professionalism of judgment).
Conclusion: This model can define the variables used in future research by referring to the literature of the auditor's professional judgment. Since the professional judgment of independent auditors has a complex and multifaceted nature, and in addition to the personal characteristics and performance of the auditors, they are influenced by the attributes of the company, the stakeholders, legal and regulatory environment, thus, for a more comprehensive examination of the subject, the modeling of auditor's professional judgment have review from different aspects.


Abdolmohamadi, M.J. & Shanteau, J. (1992). Personal Attributes of Expert Auditors. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 53(2), 158- 172.
Abdolmohammadi, M., & Wright, A. (1987). An Examination of the Effects of Experience and Task Complexity on Audit Judgment. The Accounting Review, 62(1), 1-13.
Abdul Halim, H., Jaffar, H., Janudin, S. (2018). Factor Influencing Proffessional Judgment of Auditor in Malaysia. The International Bussiness Research, 11(11), 119- 127.
Abolmaali, Kh. (2012). Qualitative research from theory to practice(1st Edition). Tehran, Elm Publications. (in Persian)
Accounting Standard Setting Committee (2018). Auditing Standards. Tehran, Audit Organization. (in Persian)
Bedard, J., & Chi, M.T.H. (1993). Expertise in Auditing Auditing. Journal of Practice and Theory, 12(1), 21-45.
Bernstein, L. (1967). The Concept of Materiality. The Accounting Review, 42(1), 86-95.
Buchman, T. A., Tetlock, P. E. & Reed, R.O. (1996). Accountability and auditors’ judgments about contingent events. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 23(3), 379- 398.
Corbin, J., Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research, techiniques and procedures for developing Grounded Theory. (3th edition). Sage Publications, Inc.
DeZoort, F. (2008). Audit Committee Member Support for Proposed Audit Adjustments: Pre-SOX versus Post-SOX Judgements. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 27 (1), 85–104.
DeZoort, T., Harrison, P. & Taylor, M. (2006). Accountability and auditors’ materiality judgments: The effects of differential pressure strength on conservatism, variability, and effort. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(4-5), 373-390.
Dyckman, T.R., Gibbins, M. & Swieringa, R. (1978). Experimental and survey research in financial accounting: review and evaluation, in The Impact of Accounting Practice and Disclosure (eds. R. Abdel-Khalik and T. Keller), Duke University Press.
Ferasatkhah, M. (2016). Coding guide for qualitative researchers (2nd Edition), Tehran, Agah Publications. (in Persian)
Gibbins, M., & Mason, A. K. (1998). Professional Judgment in Financial Reporting Canadian. Institue of Charterd Accountants.
Givian, A. (2016). Qualitative research method in social sciences (1st Edition). Tehran, Elmi Farhangi Publications. (in Persian)
Heyrani, F., Vakilifard, H., & Rahnamay Roudposhti, F. (2017). Professionalism and Auditors’ Professional Judgment. Accounting Knowledge & Management Auditing, 6(22), 1-12. 
(in Persian)
Iman, M. (2014). Qualitative research methodology (1st Edition). Qom, Research Institute of Hawzeh and University Publications. (in Persian)
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2015). ISA200, Reporting on Audited Financial Statements. New York, NY: IAASB.
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.(2018). Handbook of International Quality Control, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance, and Related Services Pronouncements. New York, NY: IAASB.
International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). (2016). Handbook of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants, NewYork, NY: International Federation of Accountant.
Khoshtinat, M., Bostanian, J. (2008). Professional judgment in auditing. Emperical studies in financial accounting quarterly, 5(18), 25-57. (in Persian)
Mashayekhi, B., Mehrani, K., Rahmani, A., & Madahi, A. (2013). Development of the Audit Quality Model. Journal of Securities Exchange, 6(23), 103-137. (in Persian)
Mautz, R.K., & Sharaf, H. (1961). Philosophy of Auditing, Evanston. American Accounting Association.
Messier, W.F., & Quilliam, W.C. (1992). The Effect of Accountability on Judgement: Development of Hypotheses for Auditing. A Journal of Practice & Theory, 11(1), 123-138.
Molanazari, M., Esmaili Kia, G. (2014). Psychological characteristics contributing to expertise in audit judgment. Accounting and Auditing Review, 21 (4), 505- 526. (in Persian)
Noravesh, I. (2017). Comprehensive review of auditing (8th Edition), Tehran, Negahe Danesh Publications. (in Persian)
Rahimian, N. (2005). Judgment and decision making in auditing. Certified Public Accountant, (9), 10-18. (in Persian)
Rahimian, N. (2005). The effect of experience on the use of irrelevant evidence in auditing judgments. Accountant, 20(170), 7-10. (in Persian)
Rahimian, N., Hassas Yeganeh, Y. (2007). Justify decisions in audit planning. Accounting and Auditing Review, (14), 39-62. (in Persian)
Rajab Alizadeh, A., Hesarzadeh, R., & Bagherpour, M. (2016). An Investigation of the Relationship between Two Dimensions of Presumptive Doubt and Professional Skepticism with Professional Judgment of an Auditor. Accounting and Auditing Review, 23(2), 173-192. (in Persian)
Saeidi, M., Nasseri, A. (2017). The effect of personality type on the auditor's professional judgment in allocating time budget to accounts containing estimates. Iranian Journal of Value & Behavioral Accounting, 2(3), 169-184. (in Persian)
Sayrani, M., Khajavi, S., & Noshadi, M. (2014). An Examination of the Effects of Experience and Task Complexity on Audit Judgments. Accounting and Auditing Review, 16(2), 35-50. (in Persian)
Shelton S.W. (1999). The Effect of Experience on the Use of Irrelevant Evidence in Auditor Judgement. The Accounting Review, 74(2), 217- 224.
Strauss, A., Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative Research: techniques and procedures for developing Grounded Theory. (2nd edition). Sage Publications, Inc.
Teylor, C. (2006). The Effects of Experience on Complex Problem Representation and Judgment In Auditing: An Experimental Investigation, Behavioral Research in Accounting.
The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (1995). Professional Judgment and Auditor, CICA Research Report.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (2012). A Professional Judgement Framework for financial reporting decision making. An international guide for preparers, auditors, audit committees. Regulators and standard setters across business and not-for-profit sectors.