More Skeptical Judgments and Choices with Female Auditors than with Male Auditors

• In Event: Continental Breakfast - Research and Education Forum
  In Roundtable Session: Table 16: Professional Skepticism 2

Abstract

Although standard setters call for enhanced professional skepticism, we still know little about how to achieve such a goal. It is possible that female auditors’ skepticism is more heightened than male auditors’ skepticism. I explore the effects of auditors’ gender in the Olsen et al. (2014) experiment on auditor’s skeptical judgment and choice. The most interesting result in this study suggests that female auditors are more skeptical than are male auditors in their judgments and choices. This result suggests that enhanced professional skepticism can be attained by increasing the number of female auditors in an audit. I acknowledge that this is not a causal relationship but rather an association. I also find that situational professional skepticism mediates the influence of client risk on auditor’s judgment. I also find that skeptical choices are more sensitive to experimental setting features than are skeptical judgments. Future research may support or refute my findings.

Author

• Cardamine Carmen Olsen, Norwegian School of Economics