Evaluation of Audit Evidence Quality in Public Accounting Firms in DKI Jakarta: Perspectives of Professional Scepticism, Auditor Experience, and Artificial Intelligence Usage
Open accessAbstract
In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, marked by a societal shift termed Society 5.0, this study investigates the repercussions on audit evidence quality in public accounting firms in DKI Jakarta. As a cornerstone of economic stability, the accounting profession grapples with challenges imposed by social distancing measures. This research, conducted between November 2023 and February 2024, employs online questionnaires to gather insights from 58 auditors in DKI Jakarta's Public Accounting Firms. Aligning with Sugiono's framework, the study focuses on one dependent variable (Quality of Audit Evidence) and four independent variables: Auditor Work Experience (X1), Professional Scepticism (X2), Artificial Intelligence (X3), and Audit Staff Quality (X4). Hypothesis testing reveals significant positive relationships, emphasizing the enhanced capabilities of audit staff through Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration and the positive contribution of experienced auditors to the quality of audit evidence. While professional skepticism positively influences audit team performance, its impact on the quality of audit evidence prompts further exploration. The study's practical implications recommend embracing AI, prioritizing experienced auditors, fostering professional skepticism, and making strategic staffing decisions for public accounting firms in DKI Jakarta. Theoretical contributions enrich auditing literature by exploring nuanced relationships among key variables, and future research is encouraged to delve into contextual factors influencing professional skepticism and audit staff quality. Ultimately, this study contributes valuable insights to the continual improvement of auditing practices in DKI Jakarta and beyond.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Ethical Implications of Using Artificial Intelligence in Auditing
Munoko, I., Brown‐Liburd, H. L., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2020) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04407-1 · Cited by 746 · see citing works
Adopting generalized audit software: an Indonesian perspective
Widuri, R., O'Connell, B. T., & Yapa, P. (2016) · Managerial Auditing Journal · doi:10.1108/maj-10-2015-1247 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Al Yaqin, B. K. (2018). Pengaruh Tipe Klien dan Tipe Komunikasi terhadap Pengumpulan Bukti Audit (Studi pada Kantor Akunntan Publik Kota Bandung). JASa (Jurnal Akuntansi, Audit dan Sistem Informasi Akuntansi), 2(2), 1-8.
- Al-Aroud, S. F. (2020). The Impact Of Artificial Intelligence Technologies On Audit Evidence. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 24, 1-11.
- Al-Sayyed, S., Al-Aroud, S., & Zayed, L. (2021). The effect of artificial intelligence technologies on audit evidence. Accounting, 7(2), 281-288.
- Bennett, G. B., & Hatfield, R. C. (2013). The effect of the social mismatch between staff auditors and client management on the collection of audit evidence. The Accounting Review, 88(1), 31-50.
- Bizarro, P. A., Crum, E., & Nix, J. (2019). The Intelligent Audit. ISACA Journal, 6, 23-29.
- Fitriani, N. A., & Chariri, A. (2014). Pengaruh tipe klien dan tipe komunikasi terhadap pengumpulan bukti audit (Studi persepsi auditor KAP di Jawa Tengah) (Doctoral dissertation, Fakultas Ekonomika dan Bisnis).
- Hidayat, D., & Utami, G. C. (2018). Pengaruh Tipe Klien dan Tipe Komunikasi Terhadap Pengumpulan Bukti Audit. Jurnal Ekonomi KIAT, 29(1), 21-28.
- Lestari, D. S. (2005). Pengaruh pengalaman auditor terhadap penggunaan bukti tidak relevan dalam auditor judgement (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Mercu Buana).
- Mugabe, T., Ndlovu, J., & van Zijl, W. (2022). COVID-19 and electronic audit evidence gathering in South Africa. Southern African Journal of Accountability and Auditing Research, 24(1), 97-117.
- Putra, G. S. A., & Dwirandra, A. A. N. B. (2019). The effect of auditor experience, type of personality and fraud auditing training on auditors' ability in fraud detecting with professional skepticism as a mediation variable. International research journal of management, IT and social sciences, 6(2), 31-43.
- Rahim, S., Ahmad, H., Nurwakia, N., Nurfadila, N., & Muslim, M. (2020). The Influence of Audit Staff Quality and Client Type on Audit Evidence Collection with Communication Type as Moderation. Journal of Accounting and Strategic Finance, 3(1), 103-117.
- Singh, S. and Sukhvinder, S. (2010). Artificial Intelligence. International Journal of Computer Applications, 6, pp.21-211. Available at: http://www.ijcaonline.org/volume6/number6/pxc3871413.pdf [Accessed 16 Apr. 2017].
- Utami, N. M. (2018). PENGARUH TIPE KLIEN DAN TIPE KOMUNIKASI TERHADAP PENGUMPULAN BUKTI AUDIT (Studi Persepsi Auditor KAP di Makassar) (Doctoral dissertation, UNIVERSITAS BOSOWA).
- Vagner, B. (2022). The effect of personalized audit communication and evidence inconsistency on auditor judgments and decision-making. Managerial Auditing Journal, 37(8), 1038-1061.
- Authors
- Rajagukguk, J. S. S., Harnovinsah, & Mulyadi, J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research
- Publisher
- Origins Journal Publication [OJP]
- Published
- 2024
- Volume
- 06
- Issue
- 01
- Pages
- 291-304
- ISSN
- 2582-0265 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4399865592
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Governance and Financial Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting and Financial Management
- Keywords
- public accounting firms, professional skepticism, auditor experience, artificial intelligence in auditing, Society 5.0, Jakarta
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
