OBEDIENCE PRESSURE AND AUDITOR SENIORITY MODERATE

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

120

OBEDIENCE PRESSURE AND AUDITOR SENIORITY MODERATE THE EFFECT OF

TASK COMPLEXITY ON AUDIT JUDGMENT

I Dewa Gde Dharma Suputra

I Ketut Jati

ABSTRACT

The quality of the auditors' audit judgment was questioned as several fraud cases were linking several companies going public

even though they had been audited and obtained an unqualified opinion / WTP. Empirical research shows that audit complexity

contributes to audit judgment, but the effect is not always linear because contingency factors are suspected, among others,

obedience pressure and auditor seniority. This study aims to determine the partial effect of audit complexity on audit judgment.

Meanwhile, the specific objective of this study was to determine the ability of contingency factors, such as obedience pressure and

auditor seniority to moderate the effect of audit complexity on audit judgment. The study population was a public accounting firm

/ KAP in Bali province, then the research sample was determined using a purposive sampling method. Furthermore, primary data

were collected in the form of respondents' perceptions using a modified questionnaire from previous researchers and tested for

compliance with the validity and reliability of the instrument. Then, the collected data is tabulated and analyzed using the

moderated regression analysis (MRA) technique through the following stages: classical assumption test, model feasibility test (f

test), determination coefficient analysis (adj. R2), research hypothesis test (t-test) is good for its partial and moderate influence.

The results showed that: 1) audit complexity has a negative effect on audit judgment, 2) obedience pressure has a negative but

insignificant effect on audit judgment, 3) obedience pressure strengthens the negative effect of audit complexity on audit judgment,

4) auditor seniority has a positive effect on audit judgment. , 5) auditor seniority weakens the negative effect of audit complexity

on audit judgment.

Keywords: audit complexity, obedience pressure, auditor seniority, and audit judgment.

INTRODUCTION

To obtain sufficient evidence as a basis for the auditor's opinion, audit judgment is required. The Indonesian Institute of certified

public accountants / IAPI (2015) states that audit considerations regarding the adequacy (quantity) of competent audit evidence

play an important role because it has strong implications for the quality of auditor opinion on the fairness of audited financial

statements. Based on the IAPI (2015) statement above, it can be said that the quality of audit opinion is based on the auditor's

confidence in the competence and adequacy of audit evidence, which involves audit judgment in it. Or, in other words, the audit

opinion should be linear with the competence and adequacy of the evidence and audit judgment. In reality, many go public

companies that have been audited and obtained unqualified opinion / WTP are involved in legal issues related to fraud, and various

other unhealthy accounting practices, of course, become big questions about the quality of the auditors' audit judgments.

Creative accounting scandals, such as big bath accounting, have been perpetrated by even well-known companies (Kieso and

Weygandt, 2001), such as the announcement of an adjustment for losses by IBM of $ 2.3 billion, General electric co. $ 2.7 billion,

at&t $ 2.1 billion, Nortel Networks $ 19.2 billion; the imposition of $ 1.4 billion by P&G to reduce its workforce by 9% or 9,600

employees. Furthermore, the results of research on creative accounting practices in the united states were also revealed by Schilit

(1993), and in several other countries, such as in England (Griffiths, 1995: 1996), in France (Stolowy, 2000), and Australia (

Revsine, 1989; Craig and Walsh, 1989).

Meanwhile, the US federal bureau of investigation / FBI (FASB., 1988) revealed an increase in accounting fraud, namely: fraud

increased by 75% and embezzlement up 26%. Corporate fraud carries a weight far beyond the usual cheating and embezzlement.

Furthermore, the national commission on fraudulent financial reporting, the united states of America (National Commission on

Fraudulent Financial Reporting, 1989) states that fraud in financial reports is deliberate behavior in the form of actions or omissions

through fraud in the accounting system which results in material misleading financial reports, such as input error schemes (false

or exaggerated claims, lapping, kitting, manipulation and reclassification of inventory, deliberate misclassification of expenses,

falsification of sales data and cost of goods), fraud through forgery and external fraud (scavenging, destroying and destroying

outside).

The domestic scandal was opened up by an action by the honorary council of the Indonesian Accountants Association (IAI) against

10 public accounting firms that committed violations, following the government's objection to sanctions in the form of a plus

warning that had been given. The 10 KAP were indicated as having committed serious violations when auditing the banks which

were liquidated in 1998 regarding the BLBI case. Also, there are financial and managerial cases of public companies that cannot

be detected by auditors which have resulted in the company being fined by Bapepam (Winarto, 2008), such as the century bank

case and various other similar cases. The reality of the company being involved in legal problems due to fraud and various other

unhealthy accounting practices, even though the company has been audited and has even obtained a WTP opinion, raises doubts

about the quality of the audit opinion. Allegations of weak competence and adequacy of audit evidence as a basis for auditor

opinion are also inevitable, and of course, also raise the issue of weak audit judgment.

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

121

Exposure to the phenomenon above indicates an expectation gap between public expectations and the reality of the quality of

information presented in the audited financial report. This condition is not only detrimental to users of financial statements but also

criticism of the world of accounting education and the accounting profession itself. Therefore, tracing the factors that influence

audit judgment is important and urgent to carry out. In this connection, several factors should be revealed by several factors that

contribute to audit judgment, one of which is the complexity of the audit.

Boner (1994) argues that there are three basic reasons why a task complexity test for an audit situation needs to be done. First, the

complexity of the audit is thought to have a significant effect on the performance of an auditor. Second, certain decision-making

tools and techniques and exercises are thought to have been conditioned in such a way that researchers understand the peculiarities

of the complexity of the audit task. Third, understanding the complexity of a task can help a company's audit management team

find the best solution for audit staff and audit tasks.

The complexity of the task is a form of the many different actions that must be carried out and the number of signs or signals that

must be processed immediately (Trisnaningsih 2010). Audit complexity is based on individual perceptions of the difficulty of an

audit task, difficult for one person but easy for others (Restu and Indriantoro, 2000). The audit is becoming more and more complex

due to the increasingly high level of difficulty (task difficulties) and audit task variability (Gupta et al, 1999). The more complex

an auditor's task is, then this can affect the judgment that will be given. The information processing process consists of three stages,

namely: input, process, and output. At the input and process stages, the complexity of the audit task increases with increasing factor

cues (Boner 1994).

Research on the effect of audit complexity on audit judgment has been conducted by several researchers and has shown inconsistent

results. Chung and Monroe (2001) say that the interaction between gender and task complexity has a significant effect on audit

judgment. Abdolmohammadi and Wright (1986) showed that the complexity of the task had a significant impact on audit judgment.

Meanwhile, Prasita and Hadi (2007) found empirical evidence that audit complexity has a negative and significant effect on audit

quality. Likewise, research by Engko and Gudono (2007), Mulyadi (2013), Widiarta (2013). Furthermore, research by Cheng, et

al (2003), Sabaruddinsah (2007), and Jamilah, et al. (2007) found that the complexity of the audit task did not have a significant

effect on audit judgment.

The inconsistent results of previous research are suspected because other factors influence the relationship between the independent

variable and the dependent variable. Govindarajan (1986) states that there may not be any unified research results depending on

certain factors or better known as contingent factors. Murray (1990) explains that to reconcile conflicting results, a contingency

approach is needed to identify other variables that act as moderators or mediators in the research model.

Several variables that are strongly suspected to moderate the effect of audit complexity on audit judgment, two of which are

Obedience Pressure and Auditor Seniority. Judgment performed by an auditor in an audit process is influenced by many factors,

both technical and non-technical (Meyer, 2001). Technically, the auditor's point of view in responding to information is related to

the responsibilities and audit risks that will be faced by the auditor in connection with the judgment he makes.

Obedience pressure is one of the factors that can influence audit judgment. An auditor is constantly faced with ethical dilemmas

that involve a choice between conflicting values. Obedience pressure from superiors to examine the financial statements and

immediately must be audited, in these circumstances, the client can affect the audit process carried out by the auditor.

Auditor seniority is closely related to the experience of an auditor's audit task. Experience is a process of learning and the

development of potential behavior (Asih, 2006). In the field of auditing, auditor experience is an important factor required in

completing his work. The more experienced an auditor is, the more capable he is in producing better performance in complex tasks,

including conducting audits. Experienced auditing accountants will make relatively better judgments in professional duties

compared to inexperienced auditing accountants (Butts in Herliansyah and Meifida, 2006). Several researchers have conducted

studies on the effect of audit experience, including Putri (2013) who found that experience with audit judgment had a positive

effect. Similar results were obtained by other researchers, such as Raiyani (2014) and Ariyantini (2014). Based on this explanation,

it can be said that the experience of auditors or auditor seniority has a positive effect on audit judgment so that it is likely to have

the potential to reduce the negative effect of task complexity on audit judgments, which is certainly interesting and urgent to

confirm through this study.

In contrast to previous research, besides trying to confirm the ability of contingency factors such as obedience pressure and auditor

seniority to moderate the effect of audit complexity on audit judgment, it is also hoped that the results of this study can provide

added value for the development of audit theory and practice and KAP, as well as improved management. accounting education.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Agency Theory

Jensen and Meckling (1976) state that agency theory describes shareholders as principals and management as agents. Management

is a party contracted by shareholders to work for the interests of shareholders. For this reason, management is given partial power

to make decisions in the best interests of shareholders. Therefore, management is obliged to be accountable for all of its efforts to

shareholders (Sukartha, 2007). An efficient contract is a contract that fulfills 2 (two) factors, namely (1) the agent and principal

have symmetrical information, meaning that both the agent and the employer have the same quality and amount of information so

that there is no hidden information, (2) the risk borne by the agent related to the rewards for services are small, which means that

agent has high certainty about the rewards received (Sukartha, 2007). However, in reality, the symmetrical information never

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

122

happened. To overcome this problem, agents need an independent third party. In agency theory, the auditor as a third party helps

to understand the conflicts of interest that arise between the principal and the agent. Independent auditors can avoid fraud in

financial reports prepared by management (Badjuri, 2011). Gunadarma (2012) states agency theory has 2 (two) objectives, namely

to improve the ability of individuals (both principals and agents) to evaluate the environment in which decisions must be made

(The belief revision role). Second, to evaluate the results of decisions that have been taken to facilitate the allocation of results

between principals and agents according to the work contract (The performance evaluation role). Hartadi (2012) states that in this

case agency theory ultimately has a lot to do with the problem of conflict of interest that may arise from the contractual relationship

of the two parties wherein essence the two have different information acquisitions. Therefore it is necessary to have a party that

carries out the process of monitoring and examining the activities carried out by the parties mentioned above. In agency theory,

company owners need auditors to verify information provided by management to the company. On the other hand, management

requires auditors to provide legitimacy for their performance (in the form of financial reports), so that they deserve an incentive

for that performance (Gunadarma, 2012).

Sinaga (2015) states that external auditors are parties who are considered capable of bridging the interests of principals and agents

in managing company finances. Therefore, the resulting audit quality, in this case, the auditor's ability to detect fraud and the

existence of an audit tenure, can influence the external auditor in carrying out his duties as a party capable of bridging the interests

of the principal and the agent. Agency theory explains that an auditor with high audit quality will have the ability to detect fraud

committed by company management (Becker et al., 2010 in Sinaga 2015).

Attribution Theory

Attribution theory was first put forward by Heider 1958. This theory is used to develop an explanation of the ways we judge

individuals differently, depending on the meaning we attribute to certain behaviors. This theory suggests that when observing the

behavior of an individual, we attempt to determine whether the behavior is caused internally or externally (Raya, 2016). Stephen

and Timothy (2011) in Raya (2013) state that internal behavior is behavior that is believed to be influenced by an individual's

control. Meanwhile, behavior that is caused externally is considered a result of external causes, that is, the individual has behaved

in this way due to certain situations. Attribution theory refers to the causes of an event or results obtained based on individual

perceptions. In this study, attribution theory explains the effect of fraud audit training on influencing auditors in carrying out their

duties and responsibilities in detecting possible fraud. By having participated in fraud audit training, the auditors are expected to

be able to detect fraud that may occur. According to Wahyudi (2013), success or failure according to individual perceptions causes

expectations for future actions to occur and creates emotional results. In this case, auditors who have poor experience (junior

auditors) will lead to better actions in the future and will know well how materiality and skepticism should be considered so that

they can provide the right opinion and be able to detect fraud that is may occur in the financial statements.

Inverse U Curve Theory

The inverted U curve theory is one of the most widely used theoretical models to explain the relationship between pressure and

performance. Robbins (2006), in Ratnaningtias (2014), describes the logic underlying the inverted U Curve theory is that stress at

low to moderate levels stimulates the body and increases its ability to react. But on the contrary, if the stress level is considered

excessive, it will place demands that cannot be achieved, which results in decreased performance and of course can reduce the

quality of audit judgment. Auditors who are in a position of pressure often in a certain level will provide a motivational boost, but

at a level that exceeds the pressure limit, it will cause a high level of stress so that it can interfere with the audit judgment and the

resulting audit quality. According to Pierce and Sweeney (2004) in Ratnaningtias (2014) states that the results of the research

conducted found a linear relationship between stress and dysfunctional behavior. Robbins (2006) in Ratnaningtias (2014) also

states that this model does not get much empirical support. However, the inverted U theory is stated by the conditions when the

auditor is under pressure. The substance of this theory is relevant to the efforts made in this study to confirm the effect of task

complexity on audit judgment and in confirming the ability of obedience pressure and auditor superiority to moderate the effect of

audit complexity on audit judgment.

Public Accountants and Public Accountants Professional Standards (SPAP)

Public accountants or also known as external accountants are independent accountants who provide their services on a certain

payment basis. They work independently and generally set up an accounting firm. Included in the category of public accountants

are accountants who work at a public accounting firm (KAP) and in practice as a public accountant and establishing an accounting

firm, a person must obtain a license from the Ministry of Finance. A public accountant can perform audits, tax services,

management consulting services, and system preparation services. The public accounting profession has different characteristics

from other professions such as doctors and lawyers. Doctors and lawyers in carrying out their expertise earn honoraria from their

clients and they side with their clients. The public accountant profession earns an honorarium from its clients in carrying out their

expertise, however, public accountants must be independent and do not take sides with anyone even though it is their client.

Because public accountants have the responsibility to investors, creditors, or government agencies for the work they do. In carrying

out their profession, public accountants are under the umbrella of the professional standard of public accounting (SPAP). Public

Accountant is a profession whose main activity is in external audit work so that the audit must be carried out professionally by an

independent and competent person. Therefore, SPAP is made with the aim that auditors, including public accountants who carry

out auditor work, can be carried out properly. Public Accountants can perform auditor work based on auditing standards. So that

the quality of the audit results can be measured clearly because they already have applicable standards. Audit quality does not

mean the qualification of the opinion but the quality of the audit process. Auditor's requirements, work until his report is governed

by auditing standards.

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

123

Audit Judgment

Jamilah et al. (2007) audit judgment is the auditor's policy in determining an opinion regarding the results of the audit which refers

to the formation of an idea, opinion, or estimate about an object, event, status, or another type of event. Judgment is often required

by the auditor in carrying out an audit of the financial statements of an entity (Zulaikha, 2006). Audit judgment is attached to every

stage in the financial statement audit process, namely acceptance of the audit engagement, audit planning, conducting audit tests,

and audit reporting. Siegel (1989) in Mutmainah (2006) states that judgment is behavior that is influenced by the perception of the

situation. The most influential factors are materiality and belief. In auditing, the level of materiality is very important, significant,

and essential (Nugraha, 2011). Faith syndrome is the auditor's belief based on who has performed the previous audit work. Audit

judgment includes obtaining and assessing the evidence underlying the historical financial statements of an entity that contain

assertions made by the entity's management. Based on an audit carried out on the financial statements of an entity, the auditor

expresses an opinion as to whether the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the entity's financial position and

results of operations by generally accepted accounting principles (Mulyadi, 2002). Audit judgment is a personal consideration or

the auditor's point of view in responding to information that affects the documentation of evidence and making decisions on the

auditor's opinion on the financial statements of an entity. The auditor's perspective in responding to information is related to the

audit responsibilities and risks that will be faced by the auditor in connection with the judgment he makes (Jamilah et al., 2007).

HYPOTHESIS

Audit Complexity and its effect on Audit Judgment

Restuningdiah and Indriantoro (2000) stated that complexity arises from ambiguity and weak structures, both in main tasks and

other tasks. Audit complexity is a condition in which the auditor feels that the audit task he is facing is complex so that the auditor

has difficulty in carrying out the task and cannot make professional judgments. The results of research by Chung and Monroe

(2001) state that high task complexity affects the judgment taken by auditors. The same thing is also shown in Wijayatri's (2010)

research which explains that task complexity has the most dominant influence on audit judgment. As a result, the judgment taken

by the auditor is not by the evidence obtained. Based on the description of the theoretical framework and the results of previous

research, it can be said that high audit complexity will reduce audit judgment and vice versa, low audit complexity will be able to

encourage audit judgment in a better direction. Thus, the following research hypothesis can be developed:

Ha.1: Audit complexity has a negative effect on audit judgment.

Obedience Pressure and its ability to moderate the effect of Audit Complexity on Audit Judgment

Obedience Pressure is the pressure received by auditors in dealing with superiors and clients to take actions that deviate from

ethical standards (Jamilah et al., 2007). The pressure of obedience arises from orders made by individuals in positions of authority.

Obedience theory states that individuals who have power are a source that can influence the behavior of others through the orders

they give. This is due to the existence of power or authority which is a form of legitimate power. The pressure for compliance is

further complicated when the auditor is faced with conflict because the auditor must be independent in giving an opinion regarding

the fairness of the financial statements, but on the other hand, the auditor must also be able to meet the demands of the audited

entity so that the entity is satisfied with his work. Compliance pressure can produce variations in auditor decisions and increase

the likelihood of violating ethical and professional standards (Jamilah et.al, 2007). Thus, based on the above explanation, it can be

said that compliance pressure affects auditor performance. And further, that compliance pressure may also moderate the effect of

task complexity on auditor performance, it is interesting to confirm its significance. Accuracy, professional skepticism, and fraud

detection abilities are more developed inexperienced auditors so that they can still make good audit judgments. Based on the

theoretical framework and logical thinking, as well as the empirical research described above, the following research hypotheses

can be developed:

Ha.2.1: Obedience Pressure has a negative effect on audit judgment.

Ha.2.2: Obedience Pressure strengthens the negative effect of audit complexity on audit judgment.

Auditor's seniority and ability to moderate the effect of Audit Complexity on Audit Judgment

Experience has formed an auditor to become familiar with the situations and circumstances in each engagement. Kusharyanti

(2003) found that experienced auditors have a better understanding. The reality shows that the longer a person works, the more

work experience the worker will have. Conversely, the shorter a person's tenure is usually the less experience he gets. Research by

Zulaikha (2006) also explains that the experience of auditors influences audit judgment, where the main audit assignment needs to

pay attention to his experience as an auditor. Audit complexity is influenced by high ambiguity, namely the variety of outcomes

expected by clients from auditing activities and the amount of irrelevant information, in the sense that the information is

inconsistent with the events to be predicted (Chung and Monroe, 2001). Increasing complexity in a task decreases the level of

success of the task, and the quality of the audit will decrease because in this condition the auditor cannot make a good audit

judgment. However, auditors who have sufficient audit experience (senior auditors) will help make it easier to perform audit work

in complex audit situations. Research conducted by Tri (2005), Shelton (1999), and Haynes (1998). generally indicates that

experience plays an important role in shaping an auditor's judgment. The more experienced an auditor is, the more capable he is in

dealing with complex audits so that his audit judgment is better. Accuracy, professional skepticism, and fraud detection abilities

are more developed in senior auditors so that they can still make good audit judgments. So, based on the theoretical exposure and

the results of the empirical research above, the following research hypotheses can be developed:

Ha.3.1: Auditor seniority has a positive effect on audit judgment.

Ha.3.2: Auditor seniority weakens the negative effect of audit complexity on audit judgment.

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

124

RESEARCH METHODS

The population in this study were all auditors who worked at KAP Bali Province and were registered in the directory of the

Indonesian Public Accountants Institute (IAPI) in 2016. The method of determining the sample chosen was non-probability

sampling with a saturated sampling technique. Saturated sampling technique is a sample selection that is carried out when the

entire population is used as a sample. This study uses response data collected using a questionnaire that has met the requirements

for the validity and reliability of the instrument. Furthermore, the collected data is tabulated and tested for compliance with the

classical assumption test, model feasibility test, and coefficient of determination analysis. Then, the research hypothesis is tested

using simple regression analysis techniques to determine the effect of audit complexity on audit judgment, and then MRA

(Moderated Regression Analysis) is used to determine the ability of obedience pressure and auditor seniority to moderate the effect

of audit complexity on audit judgment.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive statistics in this study are presented to provide information about the characteristics of the research variables, including

the mean and standard deviation. Measuring the average is the most common way to measure the central value of data distribution.

While the standard deviation is the difference in the value of the data under study and its average value. The results of descriptive

statistics are presented in Table 1. as follows.

Tabel 1. Descriptive statistics

Min

Max

Mean

Std. Deviation

Task Complexity (KT)

1.00

4.83

2.8964

.75223

Obedience Pressure (OP)

1.75

4.75

2.7890

.80283

Audit Seniority (AU)

2.00

4.88

3.9688

.60082

Audit Judgment

2.33

5.00

4.0064

.60370

Valid N (listwise)

Hypothesis Test

The data quality test used in this study is a validity t, a reliability test. The classic assumption test used in this study is the normality

test, multicollinearity test, and heteroscedasticity test. The results of the validity test show that the variables of task complexity,

obedience pressure, auditor seniority, and audit judgment have a Pearson correlation of more than 0.3, so it can be said that the

statements in the questionnaire have met the valid requirements. While the reliability test results show that the Cronbach's Alpha

value for each variable is greater than 0.60. Thus, it can be stated that all variables have met the reliability or reliability

requirements. The results of the normality test show that the significance value is 0.089> 0.05, so it can be said that the research

data is normally distributed. The multicollinearity test results show that the tolerance or VIF value of each variable is less than 10

or greater than 0.01, so it can be said that the model is free from multicollinearity problems. While the results of the

heteroscedasticity test show that none of the independent variables have a significant effect on the dependent variable, or the sig

value is more than α = 0.05, so it can be concluded that the regression model of this study is free from heteroscedasticity symptoms.

Multiple regression and MRA tests have been carried out to test the effect of KT on AJ and to test the ability of the OP and SA

variables to moderate the effect of KT on AJ, with the results as presented in Table 2 and Table 3.

Tabel 2. Multiple Regression Test Results

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

Sig.

Std. Error

Beta

(Constant)

35.055

6.674

5.253

.000

-.637

.113

-.460

-5.623

.045

-.001

.125

-.001

-.011

.081

.378

.058

.529

6.476

.000

a. Dependent Variable: AJ

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

125

Tabel 3.Test Results of Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA)

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

Sig.

Std. Error

Beta

(Constant)

13.850

17.787

.779

.440

-.284

.686

-.205

-.414

.031

-.745

.445

-.426

-1.675

.100

.347

.186

.485

1.868

.008

KT.OP

-.030

.018

-.846

-1.728

.045

KT.SA

.000

.006

.016

.061

.025

a. Dependent Variable: AJ

Based on Table 2. it can be seen that the value of the KT variable beta coefficient is -0.637 with the Sig. = 0.045 which is smaller

than α = 0.05. This means that the KT variable has a negative effect on AJ. Thus the results of this study accept the research

hypothesis Ha.1 which states that task complexity has a negative effect on audit judgment. Based on Table 2. it can be seen that

the beta coefficient value of the OB variable is -0.001 with a Sig. = 0.081 which is greater than α = 0.05. This means that the OP

variable has a negative but insignificant effect on AJ. Thus the results of this study reject the research hypothesis Ha.2 which states

that obedience pressure has a negative effect on audit judgment. Based on Table 2. it can be seen that the value of the SA variable

beta coefficient is 0.378 with a Sig. = 0.000 which is smaller than α = 0.05. This means that the SA variable has a positive effect

on AJ. Thus the results of this study accept the research hypothesis Ha.3.1 which states that task complexity has a positive effect

on audit judgment. Furthermore, a test of the ability to moderate the OP and SA variables was carried out on the effect of KT on

AJ and the results are presented in Table 3. Based on Table 3. It can be seen that the value of the beta coefficient of the KT.OP

variable is -0.030 with a Sig. = 0.045 which is smaller than α = 0.05. That is, the OP variable increases the negative effect of KT

on AJ. Thus the results of this study accept the research hypothesis Ha.2.2 which states that obedience pressure increases the

negative effect of task complexity on audit judgment. Based on Table 3. it can be seen that the value of the KT.SA variable beta

coefficient is 0,000 with a Sig. = 0.025 which is smaller than α = 0.05. That is, the SA variable weakens the negative effect of KT

on AJ. Thus the results of this study accept the research hypothesis Ha.3.2 which states that auditor seniority weakens the negative

effect of task complexity on audit judgment.

DISCUSSION

Task complexity has a negative effect on audit judgment

The results of this study indicate that audit complexity has a negative and significant effect on audit judgment. The results of this

study are at the same time consistent with the results of previous research by Chung and Monroe (2001) which state that high task

complexity affects the judgment taken by auditors and Wijayatri's (2010) research results which explain that task complexity has

the most dominant influence on audit judgment. As a result, the judgment taken by the auditor is not by the evidence obtained.

This result is different from the results of research conducted by Fitria et al. (2017) which states that task complexity has a positive

and significant impact on the audit judgment.

Obedience Pressure has a negative but insignificant effect on audit judgment and strengthens the negative effect of task

complexity on audit judgment

The results of this study indicate that Obedience Pressure has a negative but insignificant effect on audit judgment. These results

are in line with the research results obtained by Yusuf (2017) which states that obedience pressure does not affect audit judgment.

However, this result is different from the results obtained by Maria and Elisa (2014) who found that obedience pressure has a

negative effect on audit judgment. Based on the results of the moderation test, the obedience pressure variable shows that obedience

pressure strengthens the negative effect of task complexity on audit judgment. The obedience pressure variable in this study is

included in the pure moderation variable, which is a type of moderation variable that can be identified if the direct effect of the

moderating variable (obedience pressure) is declared insignificant but when interacted with the independent variable (task

complexity) the results are statistically significant.

Auditor seniority has a positive effect on audit judgment and weakens the negative effect of audit complexity on audit judgment

The results of this study indicate that auditor seniority has a positive and significant effect on audit judgment. These results are in

line with the research results obtained by the following researchers: 1) Kusharyanti (2003) who found that experienced auditors

have a better understanding. 2) Research conducted by Tri (2005), Shelton (1999), and Haynes (1998) generally indicate that

experience plays an important role in shaping an auditor's judgment. The more experienced or the more senior an auditor is, the

more capable he will be in dealing with complex audits so that his audit judgment is better. 3) Zulaikha (2006) also explains that

the experience of auditors influences audit judgment, where the main audit assignment needs to pay attention to his experience as

an auditor. Based on the moderation test results of the auditor seniority variable, it was found that auditor seniority weakened the

negative effect of task complexity on audit judgment. The auditor seniority variable in this study is included in the pure moderation

variable or quasi moderation, which is a type of moderation variable that can be identified if the direct effect of the moderating

variable (auditor seniority) is declared significant and when interacted with the independent variable (task complexity) the results

are also statistically significant.

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

126

CONCLUSION

Based on the discussion that has been done in the previous chapter, it can be concluded as follows:

1) The complexity of the task has a negative effect on audit judgment.

2) Obedience pressure has a negative but insignificant effect on audit judgment.

3) Obedience pressure strengthens the negative effect of task complexity on audit judgment.

4) Auditor seniority has a positive effect on audit judgment.

5) Auditor seniority weakens the negative effect of task complexity on audit judgment.

REFERENCES

Abdolmohammadi, M dan A. Wright., 1987., An Examination of Effect of Experience and Task Complexity on Audit judgment.,

Journal of The Accounting Review., LXII (1) : 1-13.

Alamri, Fitria dan Nangoi, Grace. 2017. Pengaruh Keahlian, Pengalaman, Kompleksitas Tugas Dan Independensi Terhadap Audit

Judgement Auditor Internal Pada Inspektorat Provinsi Gorontalo. Jurnal EMBA Vol.5 No.2 Juni 2017, 593 – 601

Ashton, R. 1990. Pressure and performance in accounting decision settings: Paradoxal effects of incentives, feedback and

justification. Journal of Accounting Research. 28, pp: 148-140.

Asih, Dwi Ananing Tyas. 2006. Jurnal. Pengaruh Pengalaman Terhadap Peningkatan Keahlian Auditor Dalam Bidang Auditing.

Skripsi. Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Islam Indonesia. Yogyakarta.

Astriningrum, Trisanti Rutiyana. 2012. Pengaruh Gender, Kompleksitas Tugas, Tekanan Ketaatan, Dan Pengalaman Audit

Terhadap Audit Judgment (Studi Kasus Pada Kantor Akuntan Publik di DKI Jakarta). Universitas Bina Nusantara.

Jakarta.

Bandura,A. 1986. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. EnglewoodCliffs,NY:Prentice-Hall.

Boedijoewono Noegroho. 2007. Pengantar Statistik Ekonomi dan Perusahaan. Yogyakarta: UPP AMP YKPN. Linear Ganda

dengan SPSS. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.

Bonner, S.E. 1994.. A Model of The Effects of Audit Task Complexity., Accounting, Organizations and Society., 19 (3): 213-234.

Bonner, S.E., 2002., Judgment and Decision Making Research in Accounting., Accounting Horizons., 13 (4): 385-398.

Cheng, M. M., P. F. Luckett., dan K-D Axel S., 2003., The Effect of Cognitive Style Diversity On Decision Making Dyad: An

Empirical Analysis In The Context Of Complex Task., Journal of Behavioral Research in Accounting., 15: 39-62.

Chung, J. dan G. S. Monroe., 2001., A Research Note on The Effect of Gender and Task Complexity on Audit judgment., Journal

of Behavioral Research., 13: 111-125.

Craig, R. dan Walsh, P. 1989. ”Adjustments for Extraordinary Items, in Smoothing Reported Profit of Listed Australian

Companies: Some Empirical Evidence,” Journal of Business Finance and Accounting (musim semi, 1989), h. 229-245.

De Zoort, F.T., dan Lord, A. T., 1997. An investigation of obedience pressure effect on auditors judgement. Behavioral Research

in Accounting, 6(2), pp: 1-30.

Efendi, Yusuf. 2017. Pengaruh Pengalaman, Obedience Pressure, Kompleksitas Tugas dan Locus Of Control Terhadap Audit

Judgement (Studi Empiris pada Perwakilan BPKP Provinsi Riau). Jurusan Akuntansi Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis

Universitas Lampung.

Engko, Cecilia., dan Gudono. 2007. Pengaruh Kompleksitas Tugas dan Locus Of Control Terhadap Hubungan Antara Gaya

Kepemimpinan dan Kepuasan Kerja Auditor. JAAI. Volume 11, Nomer 2:Desember.p. 105-124.

FASB. 1988. ”Ethics 1001,”US News and World Report (14 Maret 1988), h. 76.

Ghozali, Imam. 2011. Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS, Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang.

Gibbin, M. 1984. Propositions About The Psychology of Professional Judgment in Public Accounting. Journal of Accounting

Research. pp: 103-125.

Govindarajan, V. 1986. Impact Of Participation In The Budgetary Process On Management Attitudes And Performance:

Universalistic And Contigency Perspectives. Decision Sciences. pp. 496 –516.

Griffiths, I. 1995. Creative Accounting (London; Macmillan).

Hartanto, Hansiandi Yuli dan Indra Wijaya 2001.Analisis Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan Terhadap Judgment Auditor.Jurnal

Akuntansi dan Manajemen.

Haynes, C. M., J. G. Jenkins & S. R. Nutt. “The Relationship between Client Advocacy and Audit Experience: An

Exploratory Analysis.” Auditing: A Journal o f Practice & Theory 17, no.2 (Fall 1998): 88 - 104.

Hogarth. R. M., dan H.J. Einhorn. 1992.Order Effects in Belief Updating: The BeliefAdjustment Mode, Cognitive Psychology.

2(4),pp:1 – 55.

Idris, Fitriani Seni. 2012. Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan, Kompleksitas Tugas, Pengetahuan dan Persepsi Etis Terhadap Audit

Judgement. SkripsiFakultas Ekonomika dan Bisnis Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.

Irwanti, Nurdiyani Ajeng. 2011. Pengaruh Gender,Tekanan Ketaatan Terhadap Audit Judgement, Kompleksitas Tugas Sebagai

Variabel Moderating.SkripsiFakultas Ekonomi Universitas Diponegro. Semarang.

Iyer, Venkataraman M. and Dasaratha V. Rama. 2004. Clients’ Expectations on Audit Judgments: A Note. Behavioral Research

In Accounting. 16, pp: 63-74.

Jamilah, Siti, Zaenal Fanani, dan Grahita Chandrarin. 2007. Pengaruh Gender, Tekanan Ketaatan, dan Kompleksitas Tugas

Terhadap Audit Judgement. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi 10.Unhas Makassar.

Jusup, Al Haryono. 2002. Auditing. Buku 2.Cetakan ke-1.Yogyakarta: STIE YKPN.

Kanfer, R. and Ackerman, P. L. 1989. Motivation and Cognitive Abilities: An Integrative/Aptitude:treatment Approach to Skill

Ac quisition. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 74: 657:690.

Kieso, Donald E. dan Weygandt, J. J. (2001).Intermediate Accounting, Eight Edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

127

Kredit Macet Rp. 52 Miliar, Akuntan Publik Diduga Terlibat.

http://regional.kompas.com/read/2010/05/18/21371744/Akuntan.Publik.Diduga.Terlibat. Diunduh tanggal 15. Bulan

Februari. Tahun 2015.

Lianitami, Wina. 2015. Pengaruh Pemahaman Bisnis Klien, Pengalaman Audit dan Kompetensi Auditor Terhadap Strategi

Pendeteksian Kecurangan (Studi Empiris pada Kantor Akuntan Publik di Bali dan Jawa Timur). Skripsi.Fakultas

Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Udayana.

Libby, R., 1995., The Role of Knowledge and Memory in Audit judgment. In Judgment and Decision-Making Research in

Accounting and Auditing, edited by R. Ashton, and A. Ashton. , NY: Cambridge University Press.

Magdalena, Maria dan Tjondro, Elisa. 2014. Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan, Pengalaman Audit, Dan Audit Tenure Terhadap Audit

Judgement. Tax & Accounting Review, Vol. 4, No.1, 2014.

McClelland, David C. 1961. The Achieving Society. New York: A Division of Macmillan.

Meuwissen, Roger, Moers, Frank, Peek, Erik, Vanstraelen, Ann. 2003. The Influence of Auditor Independence Regulation on

Earnings Quality: An Empirical Analysis of Firms Cross-Listed in the US. Universiteit Antwerpen and Universiteit

Maastricht.

Meyer, M. dan J. T. Rigsby. 2001. Descriptive Analysis of The Content and Contribution of Behavioral Research In Accounting

1989-1998. Accounting Journal.

Mulyadi. 2013. Sistem Akuntansi. Jakarta: Salemba Empat

Mulyana, Refni. 2012. Pengaruh Kompleksitas Tugas, Tekanan Ketaatan, Tingkat Senioritas Auditor, dan Hubungan dengan Klien

Terhadap Audit Judgement.SkripsiUniversitas Riau.Pekanbaru.

Murray, D. 1990. The Performance Effects of Participative Budgeting, an Interpretation of Intervening and Moderating Variables.

Behavioral Research in Accounting. Vol. 2, pp.104-123.

National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting. 1987. Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial

Reporting (Washington, DC: April 1987), h.2.

Ng, Terence Bu-Peow dan Hun-Tong Tan. 2003. Effects of Authoritative Guidance Availability and Audit Committee

Effectiveness on Auditors' Judgments in an Auditor-Client Negotiation Context. The Accounting Review.Vol. 78.No. 3.

pp. 801-818.

Praditaningrum, Suci Anugrah. 2012. Analisis Faktor-Faktor Yang Berpengaruh Terhadap Audit Judgement.Skripsi.Fakultas

Ekonomika dan Bisnis Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.

Pramono, Ristyo. 2007. Pengaruh Dimensi Profesional Auditor Terhadap Pertimbangan Tingkat Materialitas Dalam Proses

Pengauditan Laporan Keuangan. Skripsi S1 Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Prasita, Andin dan Hadi Priyo.2007. “ Pengaruh Kompleksitas Audit dan Tekanan Anggaran Waktu terhadap Kualitas Audit

dengan Moderasi Pemahaman Terhadap Sistem Informasi”. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis. Edisi September 2007.

Universitas Kristen Satyawacana.

Pratama, Angga Rahmita. 2014. Kemampuan Komitmen Profesional Memoderasi Pengaruh Kompleksitas Tugas dan Konflik

Peran pada ti Auditor.Skripsi.Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Udayana.Denpasar.

Puspitasari, Ayu Rahmi. 2011. Analisis Pengaruh Gender, Kompleksitas Tugas dan Pengalaman Terhadap Kinerja Auditor Dalam

Pembuatan Audit Judgement.Skripsi.Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.

Puspitasari, Rizsqi 2014. Pengaruh Profesionalisme, Kompleksitas Tugas, dan Pengalaman Auditor terhadap Auditor Judgment

pada Kantor Akuntan Publik. Skripsi Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang.

Rahayu, Fitriana. 2014. Pengaruh Kompleksitas Tugas, Tekanan Ketaatan, Tingkat Senioritas Auditor, Keahlian Auditor, Dan

Hubungan Dengan Klien Terhadap Audit Judgement. Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Riau.

Ratnaningtias,Idiah Wahyuni.2014. Pengaruh Time Budget Pressure trhadap Reduced Audit Quality & Under Reporting of Time

: Dampak Budaya Etika terhadap Kualitas Audit (Studi Empiris pada Auditor Semarang).Skripsi S1.Fakultas Ekonomi

Dan Bisnis Universitas Diponegoro,Semarang.

Restuningdiah, Nurika dan Nur Indriantoro. 2000. Pengaruh Partisipasi terhadap Kepuasan Pemakai dalam Pengembangan

Sistem Informasi dengan Kompleksitas Tugas, Kompleksitas Sistem, dan Pengaruh Pemakai sebagai Moderating

Variable. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Indonesia, 3(2): h: 119-133.

Revsine, P. 1989. “The Corporate AIDS-Funny Financing and Creative Accounting ,” Rydges, h. 18-20.

Robbins, Stephen P. dan Judge, Timothy A. 2008.Perilaku Organisasi, Jakarta: Salemba Empat.

Sabaruddinsah.(2007). Pengaruh Gender, Pengalaman Auditor, dan Kompleksitas Tugas terhadap Audit Judgement. Paradigma

Vol. 8 No. 01.

Shelton, S. W. “The Effect o f Experience on the Use o f Irrelevant Evidence in Auditor Judgment.” The Accounting

Review 74, no. 2 (April 1999): 217 - 224.

Siegel, Gary & Marconi, H. Ramanauskas. 1989. Behavioral Accounting. Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western Publishing Co.

Solomon, I., dan M. Shields., 1995. Judgment and Decision Making Research in Auditing. In judgment and Decision-Making

Research in Accounting and Auditing, edited by R. Ashton and A. Ashton. NY: Cambridge University Press., New York.

Stolowy, Herve. 2000. ”Comptali Creative,”Enclopedic de Comptabilite, Controle debestion et audit.(Paris, Economica, 2000), h.

157-158.

Sugiyono, 2013.Metode Penelitian Bisnis (pendekatan kuantitati, kualitatif, dan R&D).Penerbit Alfabeta.

Tan, H dan A. Kao., 1999., Accountability Effects on Auditors Performance: Influence of Knowledge, Problem Solving Ability

and Task Complexity. Journal of Accounitng Research., 37: 209-223.

Tantra, Victorio. 2013. Analisis Pengaruh Gender, Tekanan Ketaatan, Kompleksitas Tugas, Pengalaman Audit, Dan Keahlian

Audit Terhadap Audit Judgment. SkripsiFakultas Bisnis Universitas Katolik Widya Mandala Surabaya.

Tielman, Andita M Elisabeth. 2012. Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan, Tekanan Anggaran Waktu, Kompleksitas Tugas, Pengetahuan

dan Pengalaman Auditor Terhadap Audit Judgement. SkripsiFakultas Ekonomika dan Bisnis Universitas Diponegoro.

Semarang.

South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 22, Issue 1 (August)

ISSN 2289-1560

2020

128

Tri Ramaraya Koroy. 2005. “Pengaruh Preferensi Klien dan Pengalaman Audit terhadap Pertimbahgan Auditor.” Simposium

Nasional Akuntansi VIII, September (2005): 917-928.

Trisnaningsih, Sri. 2007. Independensi Auditor Dan Komitmen Organisasi Sebagai Mediasi Pengaruh Pemahaman Good

Governance, Gaya Kepemimpinan Dan Budaya Organisasi Terhadap Kinerja Auditor.Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X

Makasar 2007.

Widiarta. (2013). Pengaruh Gender, Umur dan Kompleksitas Tugas Auditor Pada Kualitas Audit Kantor Akuntan Publik di Bali.

Jurnal. Bali: Universitas Udayana

Wijayatri, Astri. 2010. Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan, Kompleksitas Tugas dan Keahlian Audit terhadap Audit Judgment (Studi

Empiris pada Kantor Akuntan Publik di Surabaya). SkripsiYogyakarta: Universitas Pembangunan Nasional.

Wijono, Sutarto. 2010. Psikologi Industri dan Organisasi.Kencana Media Group.Rawamangun, Jakarta. Penerbit Kencana.

Winarto. 2008. Analisis Kualitas Layanan dan Kepuasan Konsumen Warung Internet di Salatiga . National Conference UKWMS

Surabaya.

Wiratama, William Jefferson. 2014. Pengaruh Independensi, Pengalaman Kerja, Due Professional Care dan Akuntabilitas terhadap

Kualitas Audit. E-jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana, 7(3), pp:587-597.

Zulaikha, 2006.“Pengaruh Interaksi gender, kompleksitas Tugas dan Pengalaman Auditor Terhadap Audit Judgment “.Simposium

Nasional Akuntansi IX, Padang, Agustus

I Dewa Gde Dharma Suputra

Economics and Business Faculty

Udayana University, Bali - Indonesia

Email: [email protected]

I Ketut Jati

Economics and Business Faculty

Udayana University, Bali - Indonesia

Email: [email protected]