Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 8 Download : 4

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to analyze and empirically examine the influence of auditor competence, professional integrity, and professional skepticism on audit quality in the public sector, with a specific focus on internal auditors at the Bandung City Regional Inspectorate.


Research Method: The study adopts an associative quantitative research design. Data were collected from all internal auditors at the Bandung City Regional Inspectorate, totaling 30 respondents, using a structured questionnaire. The entire population was included as research subjects through a census approach. Data analysis was conducted using multiple regression techniques to test the individual effects of auditor competence, integrity, and professional skepticism on audit quality.


Results and Discussion: The results indicate that auditor competence has a positive and significant influence on audit quality, suggesting that greater knowledge, skills, and experience contribute to better audit outcomes. Auditor integrity also has a significant positive effect on audit quality, underscoring the importance of ethical commitment and objectivity in audit work. Furthermore, professional skepticism positively influences audit quality, confirming that a critical, questioning mindset enhances the reliability and credibility of audit results. These findings collectively demonstrate that auditors' behavioral and professional attributes play a crucial role in determining audit quality.


Implications: The study offers practical implications for public-sector audit institutions by emphasizing the need to strengthen auditors' competence, integrity, and professional skepticism through continuous training, ethical development, and a supportive organizational culture to improve audit quality and accountability.

Keywords

audit quality competence integrity professional skepticism auditor

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Ramadhan, M. M. (2026). Auditors’ Professional Integrity and Skepticism Towards Audit Quality: (A Case Study At The Bandung City Inspectorate). Advances in Management & Financial Reporting, 4(1), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.60079/amfr.v4i1.675
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Akther, T., & Xu, F. (2020). Existence of the audit expectation gap and its impact on stakeholders’ confidence: The moderating role of the financial reporting council. International Journal of Financial Studies, 8(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs8010004
  2. Alareeni, B. A. (2019). The associations between audit firm attributes and audit quality-specific indicators. Managerial Auditing Journal, 34(1), 6–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-05-2017-1559
  3. Albersmann, B. T., & Quick, R. (2020). The impact of audit quality indicators on the timeliness of goodwill impairments: Evidence from the German setting. Abacus, 56(1), 66–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12184
  4. Chen, Y.-H., Wang, K.-J., & Liu, S.-H. (2023). How personality traits and professional skepticism affect auditor quality? A quantitative model. Sustainability, 15(2), 1547. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021547
  5. DeFond, M., Li, Z., Wong, T. J., & Wu, K. (2024). Competence vs. Independence: Auditors’ connections with members of their clients’ business community. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 78(1), 101702. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2024.101702
  6. Dekeyser, S., He, X., Xiao, T., & Zuo, L. (2024). Auditor industry range and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 77(2), 101669. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2023.101669
  7. Gajewski, J.-F., Heimann, M., Léger, P.-M., & Teye, P. (2025). Enhancing auditors’ professional skepticism through nudges: an eye-tracking experiment. Accounting and Business Research, 55(4), 426–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2024.2364215
  8. Gunawan, D., & Ayu Lestari, M. (2025). Impact of Auditor Independence, Professionalism, and Skepticism on Audit Quality. Advances in Accounting Innovation, 1(2), 178–187. https://doi.org/10.69725/aai.v1i2.193
  9. Israa, A. A., & Al-Tamimib, A. H. Y. (2025). The Effect of Due Professional Care, Norms, Ethics, and Attitude on Audit Quality. Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 15(2), 20884–20890. https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.9831
  10. Istianah, I., & Akbar, R. (2024). A Systematic Review of Factors Influencing Audit Quality in Public Sector Organizations. Proceedings of the 21st Asian Academic Accounting Association (FourA) Annual Conference. https://www.foura.org/download/foura_2024/proceedings/355.pdf.
  11. Kamil, I., Ariani, M., & Irawan, I. A. (2023). The Influence of Competency, Auditor Ethics, and Independence on Audit Quality. Moestopo International Review on Social, Humanities, and Sciences, 3(1), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.32509/mirshus.v3i1.49
  12. Khulsum, U., Suryanto, T., Ali, J., & Yudha Wardana, H. (2025). Breaking barriers in audit quality: The dynamic interactions of competence, time budget pressure, complexity, and motivation in Indonesia landscape. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 12, 101905. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101905
  13. Koswara, M. K., Kustiani, L., & Harmono, H. (2023). Effect of Audit Fees, Auditor Competency, Professional Ethics and Professional Skepticism on Audit Quality. Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Studies, 6(2), 807–819. https://doi.org/10.47191/jefms/v6-i2-25
  14. Krisnia, I., & Rochayatun, S. (2024). The role of ethics, competence, auditor independence, and audit fees on audit quality: A literature review. El Muhasaba Jurnal Akuntansi, 15(2), 176–186. http://repository.uin-malang.ac.id/21085/2/21085.pdf.
  15. Mahmud, M. D. Bin, Quilim, C. A., & Hasan, L. (2024). Effect of Auditor Ethics, Audit Experience, and Auditor Motivation on Internal Audit Quality. Shafin: Sharia Finance and Accounting Journal, 4(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.19105/sfj.v4i1.12772
  16. Nanditya Andini, Cris Kuntadi, & Rachmat Pramukty. (2025). The Influence of KAP Reputation, Ethics, Integrity, and Auditor Experience on Audit Quality (Case Study on Public Accounting Firms in Jakarta Area). MAR-Ekonomi: Jurnal Manajemen, Akuntansi Dan Rumpun Ilmu Ekonomi, 3(2), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.58471/mar-ekonomi.v3i02.645
  17. Nihestita, N., Rosini, I., Hakim, D. R., & Kurniawati, D. (2018). Pengaruh Integritas Dan Skeptisisme Profesional Auditor Terhadap Kualitas Audit (Studi Kasus Pada Kantor Akuntan Publik Jakarta Selatan). National Conference of Creative Industry. https://doi.org/10.30813/NCCI.V0I0.1304
  18. Noegroho, Y. A. K., Tinungki, G. M., Hartono, P. G., & Matitaputty, J. S. (2025). Personality, cognitive style and auditors’ professional skepticism. Review of Behavioral Finance, 17(5), 938–959. https://doi.org/10.1108/RBF-04-2025-0131
  19. Prabowo, D. D. B., & Suhartini, D. (2020). The effect of independence and integrity on audit quality: is there a moderating role for e-audit? Journal of Economics, Business, and Accountancy Ventura, 23(3), 305–319. https://doi.org/10.14414/jebav.v23i3.2348
  20. Rahayu, R. A. (2020). Pengaruh Skeptisisme Profesional Audit dan Keahlian Auditor Terhadap Kualitas Audit. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Terpadu, 13(2), 242–255. https://doi.org/10.35448/JRAT.V13I2.9129
  21. Rahman, E., Royani, S., Tuasalamony, A. H., & Putri, B. A. (2024). The Effect of Competency and Professional Skepticism on Audit Quality (Empirical Study at Public Accountant Office Bandung): Audit. Jurnal Ekuisci, 2(1), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.62885/ekuisci.v2i1.461
  22. Raihan, A. D., & Setiyawati, H. (2025). Audit Quality: Competence, Professional Skepticism, Workload, And Auditor Time Pressure. Riset: Jurnal Aplikasi Ekonomi Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 7(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.37641/riset.v7i1.2125
  23. Rasuli, M., Zarefar, A., Zarefar, A., & Johari, R. J. (2024). Professional Scepticism, Independence, Information Technology, Auditor Competence, And Audit Quality. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 14(1), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.22219/jrak.v14i1.29963
  24. Rosnidah, I. (2013). Model Pengukuran Kualitas Audit Internal. EKUITAS (Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Keuangan), 17(3), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2013.v17.i3.341
  25. Saputra, R., & Firmansyah, A. (2024). The Impact of Ethic and Competence on Audit Quality: Accountability as Moderating Variable. Studi Ilmu Manajemen Dan Organisasi, 5(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.35912/simo.v5i2.3335
  26. Setyadi, R. (2021). Paradigma baru pengawasan: APIP sebagai “strategic partner.” Kementerian PANRB.
  27. Sugiyono, D. (2019). Metode penelitian kuantitatif kualitatif dan R&D. In Penerbit Alfabeta.
  28. Syalwa, M., Saftiana, Y., Susanto, H., & Yusrianti, H. (2024). Input Indicators of Audit Quality: A Framework Based on Literature Review. Jurnal Kewirausahaan Dan Bisnis, 29(1).
  29. Tjan, J. S., Muslim, M., Alimin, A., Noch, M. Y., & Sonjaya, Y. (2024). Independence, professional skepticism, and audit quality: The moderating role of audit fees. Jurnal Akuntansi, 28(1), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.24912/ja.v28i1.1698
  30. Triono, H. (2021). Pengaruh skeptisme profesional, independensi, dan profesionalisme auditor terhadap kualitas audit (studi kasus auditor) pada Kap di Kota Semarang. JAKA (Jurnal Akuntansi, Keuangan, Dan Auditing), 2(2). https://doi.org/10.56696/jaka.v2i2.5418
  31. Wijaya, I. N. A., Setiana, S., & Rusyana, F. (2023). Profesional Skeptimisme Auditor dan Kualitas Audit dalam Era Blockchain (Auditor Professional Skepticism and Audit Quality in The Blockchain Era). Akuntansi Bisnis & Manajemen (ABM), 30(2). https://doi.org/10.35606/jabm.v30i2.1278
  32. Xie, Y. (2024). Three essays on related-party transactions. University of Southampton.
  33. Zaqiani, S. P., & Sopian, D. (2025). The Role of Auditor Competence and Independence in Enhancing Internal Audit Quality with Auditor Ethics as a Mediating Variable. Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Sharia Economics (IIJSE), 8(1), 2344–2358. https://doi.org/10.31538/iijse.v8i1.5967