By this time, information about the
need to apply professional skepticism for domestic auditors is indicated in the
International Standards on Auditing (ISA), which since 2003 have been adopted
in Ukraine as national.
2.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Due to the long absence of national
legislation on the nature and necessity of professional skepticism in the field
of independent audit, in Ukraine there are virtually no scientific developments
related to theoretical and practical aspects of the use of skepticism in the
audit profession, except for research Makarevich (2017), Redko (2020),
Shestakova (2014).
However, the analysis of scientific
works of foreign scholars shows a fairly thorough coverage in scientific
circles of the auditor's professional skepticism, which confirms the importance
and fundamentality of the concept of professional skepticism for the
development of the audit profession and ensuring high audit quality.
Hurtt (2010) suggests that
professional scepticism should be a multidimensional individual characteristic,
in particular, as an individual characteristic, professional scepticism can be
both a character trait (relatively stable, stable aspect of personality) and a
state (temporary state caused by situational variables). The researcher
developed a 30-point scale to be able to measure the level of individual
professional scepticism based on characteristics derived from auditing,
psychology, philosophy, and consumer behaviour research standards.
Quadackers (2009) in his
dissertation conducted a study of the attitude of sceptical characteristics of
the auditor to the judgment and decision-making of auditors. The researcher
explored the three most widely recognized sceptical characteristics:
interpersonal trust (and factors analysed by interpersonal trust factors),
suspension of judgment, locus of control (a concept introduced by American
psychologist Rotter and characterizes the subjective perception of localization
of causes of behaviour or leadership in yourself or others).
Nolder and Kadous (2018) propose a
dual concept of professional scepticism (as a way of sceptical thinking and as
a sceptical attitude) in order to develop measurement indicators for each
component. The inclusion of a scepticism component broadens the notion of
evaluating evidence by adding auditors' sense of risk as well as their belief
in risk, and this, scientists say, will improve the predicted "strength of
scepticism" in gathering audit evidence.
Jcohen, Dalton and Harp (2017)
investigated the impact of auditor qualities that determine the two most
influential points of view on an auditor's professional scepticism: a neutral
point of view and a questionable point of view. Researchers surveyed 176
auditors and concluded that a neutral view of professional scepticism has a
positive effect on the career growth of audit professionals due to a higher
level of perception of partner support, while doubts have a negative effect on
the career of auditors due to the low level of perception of partner support.
Researchers assess this fact as a worrying dilemma for the audit profession:
although sceptics can improve the quality of auditing, they are less likely to
remain in the profession.
Rodgers, Mubako and Hall (2017)
believe that the exchange of experience plays an important role in increasing
the professional scepticism of auditors. The results of the study are important
because they illustrate the importance of knowledge transfer to facilitate
auditors' use of appropriate professional scepticism when planning auditors'
participation in the task.
Researchers Hussin and Iskandar
(2015) confirmed the suitability of using the 30-point Hurtt’s scepticism scale
Hurtt (2010) to determine the level of professional scepticism used by
Malaysian auditors. In addition, the study found that there are only five signs
of professional scepticism in the Malaysian environment, in contrast to the six
traits proposed by Hurtt (2010). Rejection of judgments, according to
researchers, may be irrelevant for Malaysian auditors, as respondents require
more time to make audit decisions and may delay working with the audit.
Redko (2020) arely notes that
“professional scepticism is what is manifested in the work of the auditor; it
is only the concentration of a certain critical thinking in the course of
professional activity. Outside of professional activities, scepticism is a
person's choice”.
Makarevych (2017) compares professional
scepticism with the auditor's suspicion, noting that “the auditor's suspicion
is not a personal attitude to the customer's management, but the basis of
professional behaviour. Only a sober look will help to properly assess the
situation and draw conclusions based on the information received".
Shestakova (2014) believes that
professional scepticism is a key factor in obtaining an objective critical
assessment of the reliability of the collected evidence by internal auditors.
3.
METHODOLOGY
124 questionnaires were distributed
to auditors in Ukraine in order to conduct empirical studies to determine the
level of professional scepticism of auditors. A total of 92 questionnaires were
received, accounting for 74% of responses. The study uses a questionnaire
method to determine the level of professional scepticism of participants on the
thirty questions identified by Hurtt (2010).
Hart's scale of professional
scepticism (Hurtt, 2010) consists of 30 questions, scored on a 6-point scale,
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). 22 questions are
presented as positive statements; the remaining 8 questions are presented in
the form of reverse statements. The question, the scores of which should be
reversed are marked (r), and summed up with a negative sign.
The questionnaire aims to determine
the level of professional scepticism of the participant. Adding points leads to
measuring the degree of professional scepticism. The higher the scores is the
higher the level of professional scepticism. At the same time low scores
indicate a lower professional scepticism of the auditor.
4.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The need for professional skepticism
in audit is justified by the fact that the auditor, due to the nature of the
profession, must question the audit evidence, contradicting each other, the
reliability of documents, responses to inquiries, oral messages received from
management, since the auditor, despite his own opinion regarding the integrity
of management, should not be content with less convincing evidence.
Therefore, the application of
professional skepticism requires ongoing curiosity as to whether the
information received and audit evidence suggests that a material misstatement
due to fraud may exist. This includes considering the reliability of the
information to be used as audit evidence and, if necessary, controls over its
compilation and storage. Through the characteristics of fraud, the auditor's
professional skepticism is especially important when considering the risks of
material misstatement due to fraud (ISA, 2016-2017).
ISA requires the auditor to exercise
professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the
planning and execution of the audit, in particular:
·
identify
and assess the risks of material misstatement as a result of fraud or error,
based on the understanding of the business entity and its environment,
including the internal control of the business entity;
Obtain acceptable audit evidence
about the existence of material misstatements by designing and implementing
appropriate responses to the assessed risks.
·
form
an opinion on the financial statements based on the conclusions drawn from the
obtained audit evidence (ISA, 2016-2017).
If the auditors have no reasonable
grounds to believe that the documents are false, then he can trust them.
However, if there are doubts about the reliability of the information,
especially if the auditor has a suspicion of possible fraud, he should conduct
further investigation, determining the necessary audit procedures.
An audit performed in accordance
with ISA rarely involves the verification of the authenticity of documents; the
auditor does not have such training and is not expected to be an expert in
authentication. However, if the auditor identifies conditions that lead him to
believe that the document may be authentic or that the conditions in the
document have been changed but such information has not been disclosed to the
auditor, possible procedures for further investigation may include: direct
confirmation by a third party; using the work of an expert to assess the
authenticity of the document (ISA 2016-2017).
The Law of Ukraine "On Auditing
Activity" dated April 22, 1993 did not contain a definition of
professional skepticism, which, in our opinion, was a significant gap in the
domestic legislation that regulated audit activity.
The new Law "On the audit of
financial statements and auditing activities" dated December 21, 2017
(hereinafter - the Law), which is aimed at bringing domestic legislation in the
field of independent audit with European standards, contains the definition of
professional scepticism, given in Art. 6: auditors and audit entities are
required to comply with the principle of professional scepticism in the
provision of audit services, which provides for the assumption of the
possibility of material misstatement of information disclosed in the financial
statements, due to facts or behaviour identified during the audit, indicating
violations, including fraud or error, despite the previous experience of the
auditor and the subject of the audit activity on the honesty and decency of the
officials of the legal entity whose financial statements are being audited (Law
of Ukraine "On the audit of financial statements and audit
activities").
Analysing the definitions of
professional scepticism given in Ukrainian legislation, it should be noted that
it is the broadest of all those presented in the audit standards. In this case,
we are talking about the principle of professional scepticism.
In general, a principle (lat.
Principium - beginning, foundation) is the main starting point of any
scientific system, theory, ideological direction (http://sum.in.ua/s/pryncyp).
That is, the auditor must always
admit the possibility of material misstatement of information as a result of
error or fraud, using his own critical thinking as the basis for collecting and
evaluating evidence obliges him to question the written and oral statements of
the client's management personnel, despite the honesty of his management and
previous experience of the auditor.
In addition, the Law states that the
auditor and the subject of the audit activity should critically and doubtfully
approach the fair value estimates applied by the legal entity, the decrease
(restoration) of the usefulness of assets, collateral (reserves) and future
cash flows affecting the assessment of the ability of the legal entity continue
their activities on an ongoing basis (Law).
Redko (2020) believes that "the
professional skepticism of the auditor is the basis of his professional
independence, and if the auditor is really independent, then during the audit
he constantly corrects something, clarifies, changes something." Such
actions occur as a result of the auditor's application of his own critical thinking
in relation to the information he receives as audit evidence from the client
during the audit process.
Using the principle of professional
skepticism means that the auditor avoids information bias by developing his own
critical thinking, based on the presence of doubts in the perception of a
particular situation. This enables the auditor to draw conclusions that will be
based on an objective perception of the information received, rejecting
subjective factors.
Makarevich (2017), for example,
believes that “different levels of verification of the auditor's work within
the company make it possible to look at the situation from different angles and
analyse the data in detail, to avoid selective perception. In order to minimize
group thinking, it is logical to include internal experts from the client's
market in the team, which will help to get an alternative view of the business
from the side of the sector practitioner, and not just the financier.
The application of professional
skepticism by auditors is facilitated by the quality control system of audit
services, which is being implemented at the audit firm and consists of the
following elements: assignment; ethical requirements, monitoring; human
resources; management responsibility for organizing quality control; acceptance
of the task and the continuation of cooperation with the client, and the
implementation of specific tasks.
The study conducted by Khorunzhak, et
al. (2020) shows that in Ukraine there is an objective need and favourable
conditions for the development of not only the quality control system of
auditing and auditing activities, but also good prerequisites for its
improvement of quality of audit services.
The quality control system
implemented in the audit firm can help auditors to increase the effectiveness
of the use of professional skepticism for the employer to use such methods (Figure
1).
Figure 1: Methods for improving the
effectiveness of using the professional skepticism of the auditor through the
quality control system of the audit firm
Source:
compiled by the author based on (Information Note)
The research conducted by the author
on the essence and practical aspects of the use of professional skepticism of
the auditor made it possible to highlight the factors that prevent its use in
audit practice, summarized in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Factors
impeding the application of professional skepticism of the auditor
Source:
generated by the author
Long-term interaction of the auditor
with the same customer negatively affects professional skepticism, because over
time, as a result of long-term relationships, the auditor weakens his critical
thinking during the audit, begins to trust more information provided by the
client's financial statements audit management. Therefore, there are restrictions
on the duration of the provision of audit services to the same company.
So, in part 1 of the Article 30 of
the Law (2017) states that the continuous duration of the assignment for the
statutory audit of financial statements for the subject of audit activity
cannot exceed 10 years.
Ball, Tyler and Wells (2015)
conducted empirical studies on the relationship between audit quality and the
term of office of the auditor, which would confirm the arguments in favour of
the rotation of auditors provided for by regulations. The term
of the auditor is measured both by taking into account the duration of the
relationship between the key audit partner and the management of the audit firm
(personal relationship), and taking into account the duration of the interaction
of the audit firm with the client. As a result of a study of 266 public
Australian firms, the researchers concluded that rotation of key audit partners
can bring qualitative benefits, but the rotation of audit firms is only an
additional cost for quality.
Bandyopadhyay, Chena and Yub (2014)
investigated the implications for audit quality of China's mandatory rotation
of audit partners every five years, which came into effect in 2014. The
scholars found that audit quality improved over the three years following the
change of audit partner in the provinces of China where there was a low level
of concentration of the audit market, but this improvement was not noticeable
in jurisdictions where the audit market was dominated by several large audit firms.
The Law (2017) establishes
restrictions on the simultaneous provision of mandatory audit services of
financial statements and such non-audit services to enterprises of public
interest: preparation of tax reports, calculation of mandatory fees and payments,
representation of legal entities in disputes on these issues; consulting on
management, development and support of management decisions; accounting and
financial reporting; development and implementation of internal control
procedures, risk management, as well as information technology in the financial
sector; provision of legal assistance in the form of: services of a legal
adviser to ensure the conduct of business activities; negotiating on behalf of
legal entities; representation of interests in court; staffing of legal
entities in the field of accounting, taxation and finance, including services
for the provision of personnel who make management decisions and are
responsible for preparing financial statements; valuation services; services
related to raising finance, distribution of profits, development of an
investment strategy, except for services to provide confidence in financial
information, including the implementation of procedures necessary for the
preparation, discussion and issuance of letters of confirmation in connection
with the issue of securities of legal entities.
As a result of the reforms, the
volume of non-audit services that can be provided to subjects of public
interest due to problems with independence has decreased, however, according to
Francis (2004), the quality of the audit will always be somewhat questionable
if other services are provided next to the audit, as they may jeopardize
objectivity and skepticism of the auditor. In this regard, public confidence in
the quality of audit can be increased by prohibiting the provision of all
non-audit services to subjects of public interest.
Referring to Hurrt's model of
skepticism (Hurtt, 2003), which has received a significant amount of positive
feedback from academics, and on the basis of which the level of professional
skepticism of auditors has been repeatedly studied (Fullerton & Durtschi, 2004; Quadackers,
2009; Hussin & Iskandar, 2015), we note that it contains six signs of
professional skepticism of the auditor of asking questions (the ability to
doubt) rejection of judgments; search for proven facts; understanding of
information received in the process of communication; confidence; certainty.
Later Hurtt developed the Hurtt
scale of professional scepticism (Hurtt, 2010), which consists of 30 questions,
scored on a 6-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly
agree). 22 questions are presented as positive statements; the remaining 8
questions are presented in the form of reverse statements. The question, the scores
of which should be reversed are marked (r), and summed up with a negative sign.
The questionnaire, which is
presented in Table 1 aims to determine the level of professional scepticism of
the participant. Adding points leads to measuring the degree of professional
scepticism. The higher the scores is the higher the level of professional
scepticism of the auditor.
124 questionnaires were handed out
to auditors in Ukraine to determine the level of professional scepticism of
auditors. A total of 92 questionnaires were received, accounting for 74% of the
responses.
The results of the questionnaire are summarized
in Table 2, allow us to assert that among the
92 Ukrainian auditors surveyed, the largest group is made up of auditors with
an average level of professional skepticism - 58% (53 people) with a high level
of professional skepticism - 29% (27 people), and the least numerous group with
a low level of professional skepticism - 13% (12 people).
Table 1: Hurtt scale of professional
skepticism (Hurtt, 2010)
|
№ з/п
|
Question
|
Bali *
(from 1 (strongly
disagree)
up to 6 (completely
agree))
|
|
1
|
I
often accept other people's explanations without further thought (r)
|
-2
|
|
2
|
I feel good
|
5
|
|
3
|
I'm
waiting to resolve the issue until I can get more information
|
6
|
|
4
|
I
am interested in the prospect of learning
|
6
|
|
5
|
I'm
interested in what makes people behave the way they do
|
4
|
|
6
|
I
am confident in my abilities
|
5
|
|
7
|
I
often reject allegations if I have no evidence that they are true
|
6
|
|
8
|
It
is interesting to reveal new information
|
6
|
|
9
|
I
need time to make a decision
|
5
|
|
10
|
I
tend to immediately accept what other people tell me (r)
|
-3
|
|
11
|
I'm
not interested in other people's behaviour (r)
|
-3
|
|
12
|
I'm confident
|
5
|
|
13
|
My
friends tell me that I usually have doubts about the things I see or hear
|
4
|
|
14
|
I
like to understand the reason for other people's behaviour
|
4
|
|
15
|
I
think the training is exciting
|
6
|
|
16
|
I
usually accept things that I see, read or hear as true (r)
|
-3
|
|
17
|
I'm not sure (r)
|
-2
|
|
18
|
Usually
I notice a discrepancy in the explanations
|
5
|
|
19
|
Most
often I agree with what others in my group think (r)
|
-3
|
|
20
|
I
don't like to make quick decisions
|
4
|
|
21
|
I trust myself
|
5
|
|
22
|
I
don't like to make decisions until I've reviewed all the available
information
|
5
|
|
23
|
I
like finding new knowledge
|
6
|
|
24
|
I
often find out about things I see or hear
|
5
|
|
25
|
It's
easy for other people to convince me (r)
|
-3
|
|
26
|
I
rarely think about why people behave in a certain way (r)
|
-3
|
|
27
|
I
like to make sure I review the most available information before making a
decision
|
5
|
|
28
|
I
like to try to determine if what I read or hear is true
|
5
|
|
29
|
I like learning
|
6
|
|
30
|
The
actions that people take and the reasons for these actions are fascinating
|
4
|
|
|
Together, points
|
90
|
* average
scores are given according to the results of a survey of 92 auditors
Table 2: The results of the
questionnaire survey on the scale of professional skepticism Hart (2010),
Ukraine
|
|
The level of auditors professional skepticism
|
|
High (from 124 to 100 points)
|
Medium (99 to 75 points)
|
Low (74 points and below)
|
|
Number of auditors
|
27
|
53
|
12
|
|
Average score for the group
|
109
|
87
|
64
|
Source:
Hart (2010)
It should be noted that the use of
the Hurtt’s scale of professional skepticism (Hurtt,
2010) to measure the level of professional skepticism of auditors in Ukraine is
quite acceptable both for conducting scientific research and for ensuring
quality control procedures for audit services both at the intra-firm level and
at the level of external control. quality control by regulators, which are
represented by the Quality Control Committee of the Audit Chamber of Ukraine
and the Quality Assurance Inspectorate of the Public Oversight Body of Audit
Activities.
5.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
So, the auditor should use professional
scepticism throughout the audit process, from the acceptance of the task to the
formation of the audit opinion in the audit report. Evidence of the auditor's
compliance with the principle of professional scepticism is his behaviour,
based on critical thinking and a special approach to the information provided
by management, which consists in the constant presence of doubts about its
reliability and the formation on the basis of this appropriate vision of the
number and type of audit procedures necessary to obtain sufficient and
acceptable audit evidence.
It is this approach to auditing that
encourages the auditor to be attentive and demanding of details that may
indicate the presence of risks of errors and fraud in the customer's financial
statements. The auditor should have a particular critical composition of the
mind that will encourage him to take due diligence in collecting audit evidence
without relying on the approval of management personnel.
The results of the survey of
Ukrainian auditors indicate a sufficient level of professional scepticism
possessed by auditors, contributes to their professional independence and high
quality of services provided. The use of the Hurtt’s scale of professional
scepticism (Hurtt, 2010) to measure the level of professional scepticism of
auditors in Ukraine is quite acceptable for ensuring quality control procedures
for audit services both at the internal level and at the level of external
quality control.
The studies carried out confirm the
feasibility of developing a separate working document for the auditor, which
should contain a list of questions, the answers to which would enable the head
of the audit team (the head of the audit firm responsible for the audit firm's
quality control system) to summarize information on the application of
professional skepticism by team members in the audit process. This will ensure
that the audit engagement was carried out with a high level of professionalism
and professional independence, as the use of professional judgment in the audit
is the responsibility of every auditor.
The working document should be
structured in the form of a questionnaire, which will contain a set of
questions regarding the auditor's actions, confirming the presence of his
critical thinking and doubts during the verification process and, as a result,
the corresponding adjustments are reflected in the reassessment of risks and
materiality, changes and clarification of the procedures for collecting
evidence, is displayed in the audit plan and program and related working
papers.
This is important because, despite
the fact that today, domestic regulators still do not check whether auditors
use professional scepticism in the process of providing services, however,
based on the fact that the principle of professional scepticism affects the
quality of audit, each subject of the audit activities that cares about their
own business reputation will position themselves as a professional who provides
services in accordance with the highest standards of the auditing profession.
This, in turn, implies the need to apply professional scepticism at every stage
of the audit.
REFERENCES
Antoniuk, O., Chyzhevska, L., & Semenyshena, N. (2019). Legal
Regulation and Trends of Audit Services: What are the Differences (Evidence of
Ukraine). Independent Journal of
Management & Production, 10(7),
673-686. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v10i7.903.
Ball, F. , Tyler, J., & Wells, P. (2015).
Is Audit Quality Impacted by auditor Relationships? Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 11(2), 166-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2015.05.002.
Bandyopadhyay, S.P., Changling. Ch., & Yingmin, Yu. (2014).
Mandatory Audit Partner Rotation, Audit Market Concentration, and Audit
Quality: Evidence from China. Advances
in Accounting, 30(1), 18-31. DOI: DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2013.12.001.
Bhattacharjee, S., & Moreno, K. K. (2013).
The Role of Auditors' Emotions and Moods on Audit Judgment: A Research Summary
with Suggested Practice Implications. Current
Issues in Auditing, 7(2), 1-8.
Boyle, D. M.; Carpenter, B. W. (2015).
Demonstrating Professional Skepticism. The
CPA Journal, 85(3), 31-35.
Brazel, J. F., Jackson, S. B., Schaefer, T. J.,
& Stewart, B. W. (2016). The Outcome Effect and Professional Skepticism. The Accounting Review, 91(6), 1577-1599.
Cohen, J.R., Dalton, D.W., & Harp, N.L.
(2017). Neutral and Presumptive Doubt Perspectives of
Professional Skepticism and Auditor Job Outcomes. Accounting, Organizations and
Society, 62, 1-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2017.08.003.
Coppage, R., & Shastri, T. (2014).
Effectively Applying Professional Skepticism to Improve Audit Quality. The CPA Journal, 84(8), 24.
DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor Size and Audit
Quality. Journal of Accounting and
Economics, 3(3), 183–199.
Fatmawati, D.,
Mustikarini, A., & Fransiska, I. (2018). Does accounting education affect
professional skepticism and audit judgment? J. Pengur, 52, 221–233.
Favere-Marchesi, M., & Emby, C. (2017). The
alumni effect and professional skepticism: An experimental investigation. Accounting Horizons, 32(1), 53-63.
Fei Gong, Y., Kim, S., Harding, N. (2014).
Elevating professional scepticism: An exploratory study into the impact of
accountability pressure and knowledge of the superior’s preferences. Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(8),
674-694.
Francis, J.R. (2004). What do We Know about Audit Quality? The British Accounting Review,
36(4), 345-368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2004.09.003
Fullerton, R., & Durtschi, C. (2004). The Effect of Professional Scepticism on the Fraud Detection Skills of
Internal Auditors. Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=617062.
Hardies, K., & Janssen, S. (2017). FAR Research Project:
Professional skepticism: a trending concept in need of understanding. Maandblad Voor Accountancy en
Bedrijfseconomie, 91, 274-280.
Hurtt, R., Brown-Liburd, H., Earley, C. & Krishnamoorthy, G. (2013).
Research on Auditor Professional Skepticism: Literature Synthesis and
Opportunities for Future Research. Auditing:
A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(1), 45-97.
Hurtt, R.K. (2010). Development of a Scale to Measure Professional Skepticism. Auditing: a Journal of Practice &
Theory, 29(1), 149-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.149
Hurtt, R.K., Eining, M., & Plumlee, D.
(2003). Professional
Skepticism: A Model with Implications for Research, Practice and Education. Working paper. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Hussin, S.A.H., & Sayed, I.T.M. (2015). Re-Validation of Professional Skepticism Traits. Procedia Economics and Finance, 28, 68-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01083-7.
Informatsiina Zapyska Dlia Audytoriv №10 (2013). Zberezhennia Profesiinoho Skeptytsyzmu ta yoho Zastosuvannia na
Praktytsi v Khodi Audytorskykh Perevirok. Nezalezhnyi
audytor, 3(14), 2-8. Available: http://n-auditor.com.ua/components/com_jshopping/files/demo_products/Nezalejniy_auditor_3_2013_.pdf
Khorunzhak, N., Belova, I., Zavytii, O.,
Tomchuk, V., & Fabiianska, V. (2020). Quality Control
of Auditing: Ukrainian Prospect. Independent
Journal of Management & Production,
11(8), 712-726. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v11i8.1229.
Kwock, B., Ho, R., & James, M. (2016). The effectiveness of
professional scepticism training for auditors in China: evidence from a
university in China. China Journal of
Accounting Studies, 4(2), 205-224.
Makarevych, A. (2017). Shcho potribno znaty pro
psykholohiiu audytora? Biznes. Available: https://nv.ua/ukr/biz/expert_author/makarevich.html. Access:
10 September 2020.
Mizhnarodni Standarty
Kontroliu Yakosti, Audytu, Ohliadu, Inshoho Nadannia Vpevnenosti ta Suputnikh
Posluh, part 1.
(2016-2017). Olkhovikova, O.L. Shulman,
M.K. (Transl.) Available: https://www.apu.net.ua/attachments/article/1151/2017_%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C1.pdf . Access: 12
September 2020.
Nolder, C.J., & Kadous, K. (2018).
Grounding the professional skepticism construct in mindset and attitude theory:
A way forward. Accounting, Organizations
and Society, 67, 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2020.100299.
On the Audit of
Financial Statements and Auditing Activities: Law of Ukraine № 2258-VIII (21 December
2017). Available: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua /laws/show/2258-19. Access: 02
August 2020.
Pryntsyp. Slovnyk ukrainskoi movy. Akademichnyi tlumachnyi slovnyk (1970-1980). Avaible at: http://sum.in.ua/s/pryncyp. Access: 16 September 2020.
Quadackers, L. (2009). A Study of Auditors’
Skeptical Characteristics and Their Relationship to Skeptical Judgments and
Decisions. DOI: https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/42180914/complete+dissertation.pdf .
Redko, Yu.O. (2020). Professional skepticism: webinar. Available: https://youtu.be/AGZuCJkO04M. Access: 15 August 2020.
Rodgers, W.,
Mubako, G.N., & Hall, L. (2017). Knowledge
management: The effect of Knowledge Transfer on Professional Skepticism in
Audit Engagement Planning. Computers in
Human Behavior, 70, 564-574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.069.
Rodrigues P.C.C., & Semenyshena N. (2019). Editorial Introduction. Independent Journal of Management &
Production, 10(7), 911-914. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v10i7.775.
Rodrigues,
P.C.Ch., Simanaviciene, Z.,
Semenyshena, N. (2020). Editorial
Volume 11, Issue 9. Independent
Journal of Management & Production, 11(9), 2542-2547. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.14807/ ijmp.v11i9.1424.
Sayed Hussin, S. A. H., Iskandar, T. M., Saleh,
N. M., Jaffar, R. (2017). Professional Skepticism and Auditors’ Assessment of
Misstatement Risks: The Moderating Effect of Experience and Time Budget
Pressure. Economics and Sociology,
10(4), 225-250. DOI:10.14254/2071-789X.2017/10-4/17.
Semenyshena, N., Khorunzhak, N., &
Zadorozhnyi, Z.-M. (2020). The
Institutionalization of Accounting: the Impact of National Standards on the Development
of Economies. Independent Journal of Management & Production, 11(8), 695-711. DOI: dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v11i8.1228.
Semenyshena, N., Sysiuk, S.,
Shevchuk, K., Petruk, I., & Benko, I. (2020). Institutionalism
in Accounting: a Requirement of the Times or a Mechanism of Social Pressure? Independent Journal of Management &
Production, 11(9), 2516-2541. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v11i9.1440.
Shestakova, O. (2014). Vidpovidalnist ta
Skeptytsyzm Vnutrishnikh Audytoriv v Otsintsi Ryzykiv Shakhraistva. Ekonomist, 2, 54-56. Available: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/econ_2014_2_16. Access: 17 August 2020.
The International Forum of Independent Audit
Regulators (IFIAR) (2015). Report on 2014 Survey of Inspection Findings. IFIAR: Tokyo, Japan. Available
at: https://www.ifiar.org/?wpdmdl=2064. Access: 19 October 2020.
AUDITOR'S
PROFESSIONAL SKEPTICISM: A CASE FROM UKRAINE