Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

COGNITIVE FACTORS THOSE MAY AFFECT DECISION MAKING PROCESS OF PUBLIC AUDITORS AND WAYS TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE EFFECTS

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 122, 107 - 123, 01.10.2021
https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1004755

Öz

Auditing consists of many decision-making activities such as doing research, planning, implementing and finalizing. Objectivity and accuracy of the audit work are
associated with the accuracy and objectivity of the auditor’s decisions in all steps of the audit process. Interference of cognitive factors and shortcuts in decision-making processes may lead to subjective and inaccurate audit results. For this reason, some measures are needed to be taken in order to mitigate negative effects of cognitive factors and biases. Awareness of the auditor about the effects of cognitive factors and shortcuts on the decision-making process comes as a primary measure. Auditor should be able to make a good resource allocation plan, listen and examine opposing views, and analyse his/her own deficiencies. Especially objectivity of public auditors and accuracy of the work they carry out play a crucial role in enhancing trust to the management. Therefore, audit reports that are free from cognitive biases and
shortcuts will ensure that the benefit from the arrangements made is maximised and will affect everyone’s life in a positive way. Thus, this study analyses first cognitive
biases and shortcuts that have the potential to affect decision-making processes during audits and then ways that can be used to mitigate their potential negative
effect

Kaynakça

  • Ardelean, A. (2013), Auditors’ Ethics and Their Impact on Public Trust, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 92: 55-60.
  • BDO (2021), Professional Judgment at BDO, https://www.bdo.com/getattachment/198ba5bf-ca06-4d31-a852-7d8b32416f5c/attachment.aspx?BDO-Professional-Judgment-Framework (Conceptual-Guide)-(1).pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 13.04.2021).
  • Bettinghaus, B., Goldberg, S. and Lindquist, S. (2014), Avoiding Auditor Bias and Making Better Decisions, Journal of Corporate Accounting and Finance, 25: 39-44.
  • Cassell, C. A., Dearden, S., Rosser, D. and Shipman, J. E. (2019), The Effect of Confirmation Bias on Auditors’ Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3162317.
  • Center for Audit Quality (2014), Professional Judgment Resource, Washington, DC.
  • Ehrlinger, J., Readinger, W.O. ve Kim, B. (2016), Decision-Making and Cognitive Biases, Encyclopedia of Mental Health.
  • EFAA (2019), Evidence on The Value of Audit For SMEs in Europe, Perspectives of Owner-Managers, Company Accountants and Directors European Federation of Accountants and Auditors for SMEs.
  • Fay, R. ve Montague, N. R. (2014), Witnessing Your Own Cognitive Bias: A Compendium of Classroom Exercises, Issues in Accounting Education, Forthcoming, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2461275.
  • Farr, L. (2017), How to Improve Audit Planning Effectiveness and Efficiency, https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2017/jun/improve-audit-planning-effectiveness-efficiency-201716722.html.
  • Gaa, J.C. (1992), The Auditor’s Role: The Philosophy and Psychology of Independence and Objectivity, Auditing Symposium XI: Proceedings of the 1992, Deloitte & Touche/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, pp. 007-043.
  • Gambier, A. (2021), Banishing Bias? Audit, Objectivity and the Value of Professional Skepticism, https://www.accaglobal.com/vn/en/professional-insights/global-profession/banishing-bias.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 12.04.2021).
  • Glover, S., Prawitt, D., Ranzilla, S., Chevalier, R. ve Herrmann, G. (2011), Elevating Professional Judgment in Auditing and Accounting: The KPMG Professional Judgment Framework, KPMG Monograph.
  • Glover, S. and Prawitt, D. (2012), Enhancing Board Oversight: Avoiding Judgment Traps and Biases. Monograph Distributed by COSO.
  • Guiral, A., Rodgers, W., Ruiz, E. and Gonzalo-Angulo, J.A. (2015), Can Expertise Mitigate Auditors’ Unintentional Biases?, Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, 24(C): 105-117.
  • Hilary, G. and Menzly, L. (2006, Does Past Success Lead Analysts to Become Overconfident? Management Science, Forthcoming, INSEAD Working Paper, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1753771.
  • Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (Eds.) (2000), Choices, Values, and Frames, Cambridge University Press.
  • Karavardar, A. ve Karavardar, G. (2017), Denetim Kararlarını Etkileyen Bilişsel Önyargılar, YDÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, X(1): 26-48.
  • Kitapcı, İ. (2017), Rasyonaliteden İrrasyonaliteye: Davranışsal İktisat Yaklaşımı ve Bilişsel Önyargılar, Maliye Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3 (1): 85-102.
  • Kohandel, Z., Talebnia, G. and Nikoomaram, H. (2018), The Role of Auditors’ Biases and Decision Making on Errors with a Cognitive Approach in Capital Market (A Case Study: Securities and Exchange’s Certified Auditors), Iranian Journal of Finance, 2(2): 59-82.
  • Küçüksille, E. ve Usul, H. (2013), Bilişsel Önyargılar ve Yatırımcı Kararlarına Etkileri, Yalova Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(4).
  • Long, J. (1997), The Dark Side of Mentoring, The Australian Educational Researcher, 24, 115-133.
  • Nelson, M. ve Tan, H. (2005), Judgment and Decision Making Research in Auditing: A Task, Person, and Interpersonal Interaction Perspective, Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory, 24: 1.
  • Prentice, R. (2000), The SEC and MDP: Implications of the Self-Serving Bias for Independent Auditing, Ohio State Law Journal, 61.
  • Tekin, B. (2018), Bilişsel Önyargı ve Hevristik Bağlamında Finansın İnsani Boyutu Olarak “Davranışsal Finans”: Bir Literatür İncelemesi ve Derleme Çalışması, Uluslararası İnsan Çalışmaları Dergisi, 1(2): 35-62.
  • Tekin, B. ve Temelli, F. (2020), Finansal Kararlarda Önyargılar ve Hevristikler. Davranışsal Finans Homo Economicus, Psikoloji, İrrasyonalite, Mehmet Fatih Buğan (der.), Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.
  • Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R. (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness, Yale University Press.
  • Tysiac, K. (2014), Five Elements of Effective Judgment Process for Auditors, https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2014/aug/201410836.html

KAMU DENETÇİLERİNİN KARAR ALMA MEKANİZMALARINI ETKİLEYEBİLECEK BİLİŞSEL UNSURLAR VE BUNLARIN OLASI NEGATİF ETKİLERİNİ AZALTMANIN YOLLARI

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 122, 107 - 123, 01.10.2021
https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1004755

Öz

Denetim işi araştırma, planlama, uygulama ve neticelendirme gibi birden fazla karar alma aktivitesinden oluşur. Denetim işinin doğru ve tarafsız yapılabilmesi denetçi
tarafından denetim sürecinin her aşamasında verilen kararların doğru ve tarafsız olması ile bağlantılıdır. Bilişsel önyargıların ve kısa yolların denetim sürecinde karar alma mekanizmalarına müdahil olması, yapılan denetim işinin ve sonuçlarının taraflı ve yanlış olmasına yol açabilir. Bu yüzden karar alma mekanizmalarını etkileyen bilişsel unsurların denetim işine olan etkilerinin azaltılması için bazı önlemlerin alınması faydalı olacaktır. Bu önlemlerin başında denetçinin bilişsel önyargı ve kısa yolların karar alma mekanizmalarını nasıl etkilediği konusunda farkındalık sahibi olması gelmektedir. Denetçinin kaynak planlamasını iyi yapması, karşı görüşleri dinlemesi ve irdelemesi, eksik yönlerini iyi analiz edebilmesi gerekmektedir. Özellikle kamuda görev yapan denetçilerin objektifliği ve yaptıkları işin doğruluğu, idareye olan güveni artırmada önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu sebeple bilişsel unsurlardan ve önyargılardan ari karar alma mekanizmalarına dayalı düzenlenen raporlar, yapılan düzenlemelerden maksimum fayda alınmasını sağlayacak ve her kesimden kişilerin yaşamlarını pozitif etkileyecektir. Çalışmada öncelikle denetim işinde karar alma mekanizmalarını etkileme olasılığı bulunan bilişsel önyargılar ve kısa yollar, daha sonra da bunların negatif etkilerini azaltmak için kullanılabilecek yöntemler analiz edilmiştir.

Kaynakça

  • Ardelean, A. (2013), Auditors’ Ethics and Their Impact on Public Trust, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 92: 55-60.
  • BDO (2021), Professional Judgment at BDO, https://www.bdo.com/getattachment/198ba5bf-ca06-4d31-a852-7d8b32416f5c/attachment.aspx?BDO-Professional-Judgment-Framework (Conceptual-Guide)-(1).pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 13.04.2021).
  • Bettinghaus, B., Goldberg, S. and Lindquist, S. (2014), Avoiding Auditor Bias and Making Better Decisions, Journal of Corporate Accounting and Finance, 25: 39-44.
  • Cassell, C. A., Dearden, S., Rosser, D. and Shipman, J. E. (2019), The Effect of Confirmation Bias on Auditors’ Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3162317.
  • Center for Audit Quality (2014), Professional Judgment Resource, Washington, DC.
  • Ehrlinger, J., Readinger, W.O. ve Kim, B. (2016), Decision-Making and Cognitive Biases, Encyclopedia of Mental Health.
  • EFAA (2019), Evidence on The Value of Audit For SMEs in Europe, Perspectives of Owner-Managers, Company Accountants and Directors European Federation of Accountants and Auditors for SMEs.
  • Fay, R. ve Montague, N. R. (2014), Witnessing Your Own Cognitive Bias: A Compendium of Classroom Exercises, Issues in Accounting Education, Forthcoming, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2461275.
  • Farr, L. (2017), How to Improve Audit Planning Effectiveness and Efficiency, https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2017/jun/improve-audit-planning-effectiveness-efficiency-201716722.html.
  • Gaa, J.C. (1992), The Auditor’s Role: The Philosophy and Psychology of Independence and Objectivity, Auditing Symposium XI: Proceedings of the 1992, Deloitte & Touche/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, pp. 007-043.
  • Gambier, A. (2021), Banishing Bias? Audit, Objectivity and the Value of Professional Skepticism, https://www.accaglobal.com/vn/en/professional-insights/global-profession/banishing-bias.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 12.04.2021).
  • Glover, S., Prawitt, D., Ranzilla, S., Chevalier, R. ve Herrmann, G. (2011), Elevating Professional Judgment in Auditing and Accounting: The KPMG Professional Judgment Framework, KPMG Monograph.
  • Glover, S. and Prawitt, D. (2012), Enhancing Board Oversight: Avoiding Judgment Traps and Biases. Monograph Distributed by COSO.
  • Guiral, A., Rodgers, W., Ruiz, E. and Gonzalo-Angulo, J.A. (2015), Can Expertise Mitigate Auditors’ Unintentional Biases?, Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, 24(C): 105-117.
  • Hilary, G. and Menzly, L. (2006, Does Past Success Lead Analysts to Become Overconfident? Management Science, Forthcoming, INSEAD Working Paper, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1753771.
  • Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (Eds.) (2000), Choices, Values, and Frames, Cambridge University Press.
  • Karavardar, A. ve Karavardar, G. (2017), Denetim Kararlarını Etkileyen Bilişsel Önyargılar, YDÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, X(1): 26-48.
  • Kitapcı, İ. (2017), Rasyonaliteden İrrasyonaliteye: Davranışsal İktisat Yaklaşımı ve Bilişsel Önyargılar, Maliye Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3 (1): 85-102.
  • Kohandel, Z., Talebnia, G. and Nikoomaram, H. (2018), The Role of Auditors’ Biases and Decision Making on Errors with a Cognitive Approach in Capital Market (A Case Study: Securities and Exchange’s Certified Auditors), Iranian Journal of Finance, 2(2): 59-82.
  • Küçüksille, E. ve Usul, H. (2013), Bilişsel Önyargılar ve Yatırımcı Kararlarına Etkileri, Yalova Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(4).
  • Long, J. (1997), The Dark Side of Mentoring, The Australian Educational Researcher, 24, 115-133.
  • Nelson, M. ve Tan, H. (2005), Judgment and Decision Making Research in Auditing: A Task, Person, and Interpersonal Interaction Perspective, Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory, 24: 1.
  • Prentice, R. (2000), The SEC and MDP: Implications of the Self-Serving Bias for Independent Auditing, Ohio State Law Journal, 61.
  • Tekin, B. (2018), Bilişsel Önyargı ve Hevristik Bağlamında Finansın İnsani Boyutu Olarak “Davranışsal Finans”: Bir Literatür İncelemesi ve Derleme Çalışması, Uluslararası İnsan Çalışmaları Dergisi, 1(2): 35-62.
  • Tekin, B. ve Temelli, F. (2020), Finansal Kararlarda Önyargılar ve Hevristikler. Davranışsal Finans Homo Economicus, Psikoloji, İrrasyonalite, Mehmet Fatih Buğan (der.), Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.
  • Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R. (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness, Yale University Press.
  • Tysiac, K. (2014), Five Elements of Effective Judgment Process for Auditors, https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2014/aug/201410836.html
Toplam 27 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Murat Erinç Bayrakcı Bu kişi benim 0000-0002-4217-491X

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Ekim 2021
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021 Sayı: 122

Kaynak Göster

APA Bayrakcı, M. E. (2021). KAMU DENETÇİLERİNİN KARAR ALMA MEKANİZMALARINI ETKİLEYEBİLECEK BİLİŞSEL UNSURLAR VE BUNLARIN OLASI NEGATİF ETKİLERİNİ AZALTMANIN YOLLARI. Sayıştay Dergisi, 32(122), 107-123. https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1004755