Can We Shape Trait Professional Skepticism through University Accounting Programs? Evidence from Polish University

Abstract

This paper examines whether it is possible to shape trait professional skepticism of accounting students through undergraduate and graduate university programs. Using Hurtt’s Professional Skepticism Scale (HPSS), we surveyed 432 students of the Poznań University of Economics, who follow either one of the accounting programs or the management program. Comparing the mean scores of first-year undergraduates from each program, who have been studying only for two weeks (initial level of skepticism), with the mean scores of the final-year students as proxies for the entry-level auditors (audit assistants), we calculated the change in the mean scores of students’ trait skepticism over four years of study. The results show that only the ACCA-accredited (Association of Chartered Certified Accountants) accounting program significantly increased the level of trait skepticism of the accounting students in comparison to the control group and students who followed the standard accounting program. The robustness analysis shows that independent variables, such as age, the future job that subjects wish to occupy, and the length of professional experience, have no significant impact on the results obtained. However, that both gender and professional experience have a significant impact on the mean scores may be considered as variables supporting the change of professional skepticism within the four years of study.

Auditors' narcissism and their professional skepticism: evidence from Iran

“…This difference is also statistically significant at 5% level. In this regard, Ciołek and Emerling (2019) did not report any significant relationship between age and professional skepticism of accounting students; (4) Postgraduate auditors have more professional skepticism, which is statistically significant at 5% level. Glover and Prawitt (2014) believed that education is one of the determinant factors in promoting professional skepticism.…”

“…Control variables Reviewing the literature (e.g. Ratna and Anisykurlillah, 2020; Ciołek and Emerling, 2019; Che et al. , 2017; Li et al.…”

“…, 2019), gender (Ratna and Anisykurlillah, 2020; Charron and Lowe, 2008), work experience (Carpenter et al. , 2002), age (Ciołek and Emerling, 2019), education (Glover and Prawitt, 2014; Li et al. , 2016; Che et al.…”

“…In light of the strong theoretical framework for the determinative role of professional skepticism in auditing, prior scholars conducted a number of studies and investigated several factors influencing professional skepticism among auditors. Searching the auditing literature shows that the effect of factors such as partner style and team identity salience (Stevens et al, 2019), traits and personalities of auditors (Nelson, 2009;Hurtt et al, 2013;Farag and Elias, 2016;Safarzadeh et al, 2020;Samagaio and Felicio, 2022), incentives (Brazel et al, 2016), characteristics of audit evidences (Zarefar et al, 2016;Coppage and Shastri, 2014), time and audit workloads (Ta et al, 2022;Persellin et al, 2014;Westermann et al, 2014), fraud risk assessment (Payne and Ramsay, 2005;Hughes et al, 2009), auditors' knowledge, skills and experience (Mubako et al, 2017;Carpenter et al, 2002), knowledge transfer (Rodgers et al, 2017), Iran auditors' professional skepticism auditor-client negotiation (Brown-Liburd et al, 2013), partner communications (Harding and Trotman, 2017), culture (Endrawes and Monroe, 2010), accountability (Hoos et al, 2019), gender (Ratna and Anisykurlillah, 2020;Charron and Lowe, 2008), work experience (Carpenter et al, 2002), age (Ciołek and Emerling, 2019), education (Glover and Prawitt, 2014;Li et al, 2016;Che et al, 2017) and job position (Quadackers et al, 2014) has been examined on the professional skepticism of auditors. Based on our assessments, the impact of narcissism, which is a personality trait with broad psychological dimensions and a wide variety of aspects, has received less attention from previous scholars.…”

“…Control variables Reviewing the literature (e.g. Ratna and Anisykurlillah, 2020;Ciołek and Emerling, 2019;Che et al, 2017;Li et al, 2016;Glover and Prawitt, 2014;Quadackers et al, 2014;Charron and Lowe, 2008;Carpenter et al, 2002), six variables that could have potential effects on professional skepticism are considered as our controlling variables. These include GEN which is a virtual variable that takes the value 1 for the male auditors and 0 for the female auditors; EXP which reflects the number of years the respondent has been employed as an auditor.…”