Accounting and Auditing Research

Accounting and Auditing Research

The Effect of Learning Styles on Auditor Self-Efficacy: A Test of Cognitive Learning Theory

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Reza Nemati Koshteli
Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, islamshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, islamshahr, Iran
10.22034/iaar.2024.216972
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of learning styles with the Honey and Mumford cognitive approach on auditor self-efficacy. The Descriptive-Survey method and the standard questionnaire instrument have been used in this research. The statistical sample of the study includes 513 auditors working in auditing organizations and auditing firms that are members of the Iranian Society of Certified Public Accountants. Also, the test of research hypotheses has been done by modeling structural equations using LISREL software. Test evidence shows that there is a positive and significant relationship between learning styles with Honey and Mumford's cognitive approach and auditor self-efficacy. Also, pragmatist, activist, Reflector, and Theorist learning styles have the greatest impact on the auditor's self-efficacy, respectively. The results show that learning styles affect the auditor's self-efficacy. Thus, learning styles affect auditors' belief in their ability to successfully perform tasks, decisions, and professional judgments. Therefore, the results of this research introduce the concepts of Honey and Mumford cognitive learning theory into behavioral research texts in auditing.
Keywords
Auditor
Self-Efficacy
Learning Styles
Structural Equation Modeling
Cognitive Learning Theory
  1. حیرانی، فروغ؛ وکیلی­فرد، حمیدرضا؛ بنی­مهد، بهمن و فریدون رهنمای رودپشتی. (1396)، "تأثیر خصوصیات اجتماعی بر قضاوت حسابرسان در حل اختلاف بین مدیریت و حسابرس"، فصلنامه دانش حسابرسی، دوره 17، شماره 67، صص 98-71.
  2. رض‍ایی، اک‍بر. (1390)، "رابطه ش‍یوه­های یادگی‍ری کلب و سب‍ک­های یادگیری هان‍ی و مامف‍ورد با سن و عملکرد تحصیلی دانشجویان"، فصلنامه روان­شناسی تربیتی، دوره 18، ش‍ماره 6، صص 18-1.
  3. سع‍‍‍یدی­پور، به‍‍‍من و فاط‍‍‍مه­سادات معیرمعی‍‍‍نی. (1393)، "تأثیر آم‍‍‍وزش م‍‍‍‍ولف‍‍‍‍‍ه­های ی‍‍‍ادگی‍‍‍‍ری خودگ‍‍‍‍ردان بر اساس مدل یادگیری شناختی پی‍‍‍‍‍‍‍نتریچ بر ارزش­گ‍‍‍‍‍ذاری درون‍‍‍‍ی"، فصلنامه تحقیقات در یادگیری، دوره 2، شماره 7، صص 64-53.
  4. سلیمی، علی اکبر؛ صفری گرایلی، مهدی و حسن ولیان. (1399)، "بررسی تأثیر گزاره­های خودکارآمدی بر کیفیت حسابرسی: تحلیلی بر فهم فرهنگ فردگرایی"، فصلنامه مدیریت فرهنگ سازمانی، دوره 18، شماره 2، صص 324-297.
  5. ک‍‍وارویی، رعنا؛ مومنی، عصمت و محسن حاجی زین­العابدینی. (1394)، "بررسی رابطه استراتژی­های یادگ‍‍‍یری و فرایادگیری با رفتار اطلاع­جویی"، فص‍‍‍لنامه مطالعات دانش­شن‍‍اسی، دوره 2، شماره 5، صص 78-59.
  6. مسیح­آبادی، ابوالقاسم؛ پوریوسف، اعظم و راهبه برومند. (1390)، "تأثیر سبک شناختی ارزیابان سهام بر ارزیابی و برآورد قیمت سهام"، فصلنامه تحقیقات حسابداری و حسابرسی، انجمن حسابداری ایران، دوره 3، شماره 11، صص 129-110.
  7. موسوی شیری، محمود؛ صالحی، مهدی و محمد احمدی­نژاد. (1394)، "تأثیر تعهد حرفه­ای و سازمانی حسابرسان بر رفتار حسابرسی ناکارآمد"، فصلنامه تحقیقات حسابداری و حسابرسی، انجمن حسابداری ایران، دوره 7، شماره 27، صص 53-34.
  8. نعمتی­کشتلی، رضا؛ حمیدیان، محسن؛ جعفری، سیده محبوبه و مریم صراف. (1399)، "تأثیر سبک­های شناختی حسابرسان بر ارزیابی ریسک تقلب (آزمون نظریه انرژیک گریگورک)"، دو فصلنامه ح‍سابداری ارزشی و رفتاری، دانشگاه خوارزمی، دوره 5، شماره 9، صص 33-1.
  9. ه‍‍‍ومن، ح‍ی‍در ع‍‍‍‍‍‍لی. (1395)، "م‍‍‍‍دل­سازی م‍‍‍‍‍عادلات ساخ‍ت‍‍‍اری با استفاده از ن‍‍‍رم افزار لی‍‍‍زرل"، چاپ هفتم، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
  10. Ajzen, I. (2005). “Attitudes, personality, and behavior”, Berkshire: Open University Press, 17: 183-211.
  11. Afifah, U., Sari, R. N., Anugerah, R., and Z. M. Sanusi. (2015). “The Effect of Role Conflict, Self-efficacy”, Professional Ethical Sensitivity on Auditor Performance with Emotional Quotients Moderating Variable, Procedia Economics, and Finance, 31 (2): 206-212.
  12. Blazhenkova, O., and M. Kozhevnikov. (2008). “The new object-spatial verbal cognitive style model: Theory and measurement, Applied cognitive psychology”, Journal of Theoretical Psychology, 23 (5): 638-663.
  13. Ba‍‍‍l‍‍‍‍‍kir, I. (2000). “Eff‍‍‍ect of Analyt‍‍‍ical R‍‍eview Res‍‍‍ults, Op‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍timism and Pa‍‍‍ttern fo‍‍‍r Copi‍‍‍‍ng on Aud‍‍‍it Effo‍‍‍rt of A‍‍cco”.
  14. Bandura, A. (1986). “Social foundations of thought and action”, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall.
  15. Chin, w. w. (1998). “Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling”, MIS Quarterly, 22 (1): vii-xvi.
  16. Djaddang, S., Lyshandra, s. h., Wulamdjani, H., and E. Sulistiawarni. (2018). “The Relationship between Self-Efficacytowards Audit Quality with Individualism Culture as Mediates: Evidence from Indonesia”, The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 5 (04): 4577-4583.
  17. D‍‍‍‍uff, A. (2‍‍‍‍004). “The R‍‍‍‍ole of Cog‍‍‍‍nitive Le‍‍‍‍‍arning Sty‍‍‍les in Ac‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍coun‍‍‍ting Educ‍‍‍atio‍‍‍n: Devel‍‍‍oping Lea‍‍rn‍‍‍in‍‍‍g Compe‍‍‍tencie‍‍‍s”, Journ‍‍‍al of Accoun‍‍‍ting Educ‍‍‍ation, 2‍‍‍2 (1): 2‍‍‍‍‍9-52.
  18. Fuller, L. R., and S. E. Kaplan. (2004). “A note about the effect of auditor cognitive style on task performance”, Behavioral Research in Accounting, 16: 131-143.
  19. Hermiyetti Arfah, E K. (2017). “Characteristics of The Individual Auditor's Dysfunctional Behavior (Underreporting of Time) In Audit Implementation and Reduction in Audit Quality”, Qualitative and Qualitative Research, 2 (1): 2462.
  20. Henry, J. D., and J. R. Crawford. (2005). “The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (Dass-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample”, British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44: 227-239.
  21. Hansen, J. D. (1993). “The effect of information load and cognitive style on decision quality in a financial distress decision task”, Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
  22. Honey, P. and A. Mumford. (1986). “The manual of learning styles”, Maidenhead, Berkshire: Peter Honey.
  23. Kathryn, k., chad, A., joy, R., and Z. yuepin. (2017). “Upward Communication of Audit Issues: The Effects of Issue Ambiguity and Intrinsic”.
  24. Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). “Self-efficacy in the workplace: Implications for motivation and performance”, International Journal of Management, Business and Administration, 14 (1):1-6.
  25. Margunayasa, I. G., Dantes, N., Marhaeni, A. and I. W. Sumatra. (2019). “The Effect of Guided Inquiry Learning and Cognitive Style on Science Learning Achievement”, International Journal of Instruction, 12 (1): 737-750.
  26. Ogunyemi, A. O., and S. O. Mabekoje. (2007). “Self-efficacy, risk-taking behavior and mental health as predictors of personal growth initiative among university undergraduates”, Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 12: 349-362.
  27. Parker, S. K. (1998). “Enhancing role breadth self‐efficacy: The roles of job enrichment and other organizational interventions”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 (6): 835-852.
  28. Pajares, F., and T. Urdan. (2006). “Self-Efficacy Belief of Adolescents”, Retrieved at www.infoagepub.Com/Self-Efficacy –Beliefs-of-Adolescents.
  29. R eynaldo, A. C. (2021). “Learning Styles and Preferred Learning Modalities in the New Normal”, Open Access Library Journal, 8 (4): 1-14.
  30. Raslan, I., Hegazy, M., and M. K. Eldawla. (2017). “Quality Control Elements and Auditor Fraud Risk Assessment: An Experimental Study”, Journal of Accounting and Finance, 16 (2): 157-178.
  31. Reurink, A. (2018). “Financial fraud: A literature review”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 32 (5): 1292-1325.
  32. Riggs, M., and P. A. Knight. (1994). “The impact of perceived group success failure on motivational beliefs and attitudes: A causal model”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 755-766.
  33. Shue, C. L., Jau, M. S., Sang, B. T., Tzu, L. L., and D. Weiwei. (2016). “A Comprehensive Survey of Government Auditors Self-Efficacy and Professional Development for Improving Audit Quality”, Springer Plus, 5: 1263.
  34. Sekerka, L., and R. Bagozzi. (2015). “Moral courage in the workplace: moving to and from the desire and decision to act”, Business Ethics: A European Review, 16 (2): 132-149.
  35. Siriwardane, H. P., Kin Hoi Hu, B., and K. V. Low. (2014). “Skills, knowledge, and attitudes important for present-day auditors”, Internal Journal of Auditing, 18 (3): 193-205.
  36. Tinajero, C., and M. F. Paramo. (1998). “Field dependence independence and strategic learning”, International Journal of Educational Research, 29 (3): 251-262.
  37. Urmetzer, S., Lask, J., Vargas-Carpintero, R., and A. Pyka. (2020). “Learning to change: Transformative knowledge for building a sustainable bioeconomy”, Ecological Economics, 167 (1): 106-135.
  38. Zhang, L. F. (2001). “Thinking styles and personality types revisited”, Personality and Individual Differences, 31 (6): 112-121.
  39. Zydney, J. M., Warner, Z., and L. Angelone. (2020). “Learning through experience: Using design-based research to redesign protocols for blended synchronous learning environments”, Computers & Education, 143 (1): 103-125.

 

Accounting and Auditing Research
Volume 16, Issue 64
Winter 2025
Pages 83-102