skip to main content
10.1145/3481127.3481142acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicemeConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

UTAUT Model in Predicting Auditor Intention in Adopting CAATs

Published:02 December 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

This era of the industrial revolution 4.0 affects all fields including accounting itself. So that all areas affected by the era of the industrial revolution 4.0 are both positive and negative. The industrial revolution 4.0 also has an impact on the audit field. The impact is such that auditors do not need to go to the client company's premises to request data which can now be emailed by the client company or are not required to manually calculate the client company's financial reports. The purpose of this research is to see the effect of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions on Indonesian external auditor's intention to adopt and use Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATSs). This research is quantitative causal which use statistical approach to test the hypothesis. We used primary data from questionnaires for analysis. Respondent of this research is auditor who work in public accounting firm. The result of this research is performance expectancy has a sig value. 0.433, effort expectancy has a sig. value 0.03, social influence has a sig value. 0.029, and the facilitating conditions has a sig. value 0.401. So it can be stated that Performance Expectancy (X1) and Facilitating Condition (X4) have no significant effect on Auditor's Intention in Adopting CAATs (Y), Effort Expectancy (X2) and Social Influence (X3) have significant effect on Auditor's Intention in Adopting CAATs (Y).

References

  1. N. Fonna, Pengembangan Revolusi Industri 4.0 dalam Berbagai Bidang. Depok: Guepedia, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Lamboglia, D. Lavorato, E. Scornavacca, and S. Za, “Exploring the relationship between audit and technology. A bibliometric analysis,” Meditari Account. Res., 2020, doi: 10.1108/MEDAR-03-2020-0836.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. B. L. Handoko, A. S. L. Lindawati, and M. Mustapha, “Application of resources based view on computer assisted audit techniques,” Int. J. Psychosoc. Rehabil., vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 2700–2709, 2020, doi: 10.37200/IJPR/V24I9/PR290303.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. V. Ramesh, “Digitization and audit profession,” Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 33–39, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Rahayu, Covid-19: The Nightmare or Rainbow. Covid-19: The Nightmare or Rainbow: Mata Aksara Publishing, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. I. Pedrosa, C. J. Costa, and M. Aparicio, “Determinants adoption of computer-assisted auditing tools (CAATs),” Cogn. Technol. Work, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 565–583, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10111-019-00581-4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. P. van der Nest, L. Smidt, and D. Lubbe, “The use of generalised audit software by internal audit functions in a developing country: The purpose of the use of generalised audit software as a data analytics tool,” Risk Gov. Control Financ. Mark. Institutions, vol. 7, no. 4–1, pp. 100–112, 2017, doi: 10.22495/rgc7i4c1art2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Asniarti, A. Asniarti, and I. Muda, “The Effect of Computer Assisted Audit Tools on Operational Review of Information Technology Audits,” vol. 208, no. Icssis 2018, pp. 23–27, 2019, doi: 10.2991/icssis-18.2019.5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. E. M. Mansour, “Factors Affecting the Adoption of Computer Assisted Audit Techniques in Audit Process: Findings from Jordan,” Bus. Econ. Res., vol. 6, no. 1, p. 248, 2016, doi: 10.5296/ber.v6i1.8996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. I. S. Mohamed, N. H. M. Muhayyidin, and N. Rozzani, “Auditing and Data Analytics Via Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATS),” pp. 35–40, 2019, doi: 10.1145/3361758.3361773.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. R. Manita, N. Elommal, P. Baudier, and L. Hikkerova, “The digital transformation of external audit and its impact on corporate governance,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 150, no. December 2018, p. 119751, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119751.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. M. Bradford and D. Henderson, “Barriers and Enablers to Auditors Accepting Generalized Audit Software,” ISACA J., vol. 5, pp. 1–8, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View,” MIS Q., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. R. Widuri, B. L. Handoko, and I. C. Prabowo, “Adoption of information technology in public accounting firm,” 2019, doi: 10.1145/3335484.3335500.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. C. E. Nwachukwu, T. O. Usman, S. O. Akhor, and A. O. Oladipupo, “Auditing in the New Age of Industry 4.0,” Int. J. Bus. Strateg. Autom., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 17–28, 2020, doi: 10.4018/ijbsa.20210101.oa2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. N. Mahzan and A. Lymer, “Examining the adoption of computer-assisted audit tools and techniques,” Manag. Audit. J., vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 327–349, 2014, doi: 10.1108/MAJ-05-2013-0877.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. B. L. Handoko, S. Ariyanto, and D. L. Warganegara, “Perception of financial auditor on usage of computer assisted audit techniques,” 2019, doi: 10.1109/ICCIA.2018.00052.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. I. Pedrosa and C. J. Costa, “Statutory auditor's profile and computer assisted audit tools and techniques’ acceptance: Indicators on firms and peers’ influence,” 2014, doi: 10.1145/2618168.2618172.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. J. T. Roscoe, Fundamental Research Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston, 1975.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ICEME '21: Proceedings of the 2021 12th International Conference on E-business, Management and Economics
    July 2021
    882 pages
    ISBN:9781450390064
    DOI:10.1145/3481127

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 2 December 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format