Author
Listed:
- Ruchuan Jiang
- Ying Han Fan
- Glennda Scully
- Xinxin Jing
Abstract
This study aims to investigate the personal and social influences on Chinese auditors’ intentions to accept unethical engagements when faced with ethical dilemmas. The theory of reasoned action (TRA) is employed as the theoretical basis for the investigation. Personal factors (i.e. ethical ideologies) and social factors (i.e. Chinese interpersonal relationships, termed guanxi) are included in the TRA model to examine auditors’ intentions. A survey methodology is utilised in this study. The results from a sample of 306 auditors from several cities in China show that auditors’ idealism is positively associated with their attitudes towards the rejection of questionable engagements; conversely, relativism is negatively associated with their attitudes towards the rejection of questionable engagements. In addition, auditors’ guanxi orientations (i.e. favour-seeking and rent-seeking) are negatively associated with subjective norms, which suggests that auditors are aware that their close personal relationships with clients could be in conflict with their colleagues’ or supervisors’ expectations. In the further tests, this study controls for the effects of gender and region on auditors’ ethical intentions. The results indicate that female auditors may be more sensitive to ethical issues than male auditors, and auditors in southern China might adopt a more independent and fair perspective when confronted with ethical dilemmas. The findings can help managers better understand personal and social factors that influence their employees’ moral reasoning and adopt proper measures to enhance auditors’ ethical intentions.
Suggested Citation
Ruchuan Jiang & Ying Han Fan & Glennda Scully & Xinxin Jing, 2021.
"The relationships of personal, social and demographic factors on Chinese auditors’ intentions to accept unethical engagements,"
Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 435-459, October.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:accfor:v:45:y:2021:i:4:p:435-459
DOI: 10.1080/01559982.2021.1975615
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:accfor:v:45:y:2021:i:4:p:435-459. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/racc .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.