Search results

Following recent high-profile audit failures, concern has been expressed that auditors are not demonstrating sufficient skepticism when exercising professional judgment. In particular, client assumptions and estimations relating to hypothetical valuations in financial reporting are not being challenged. This paper seeks to address the issue by advancing a decision-making framework aimed at guiding auditors beyond regulatory reductionist thinking towards an enhanced understanding of the cognitive processes which shape professional judgment in forming a reliable audit opinion.

Drawing on the normative philosophical and theological teachings of Bernard Lonergan, the authors' decision-making framework embodies reflective thinking and the data of consciousness to highlight the central role played by enquiry in the dynamics of understanding, judgment and decision-making. Such enquiry elicits challenge of the management bias inherent in hypothetical valuations.

Auditing through a Lonerganian lens allows auditors to reflect on their approach to objective decision-making by offering a set of cognitive tools to enhance the enquiry essential for nurturing professional skepticism.

This paper contributes to the literature by developing the somewhat neglected discourse on the cognitive processes essential for professional skepticism and audit judgment. The authors demonstrate how Lonerganian self-appropriation intensifies an awareness of the recursive cognitive activities pertinent to objective judgment and decision-making. This awakened consciousness has the potential not only to change how auditors question evidence to make informed judgments and decisions, but also to normalize the practice of challenge.

The objective of this study is two‐fold. First, it provides guidance to educators and trainers on establishing a cooperative learning environment. Second, it examines final‐year undergraduate accounting students' opinions on the effectiveness of a cooperative learning environment in delivering generic skills for their future professional accountancy careers. In particular, the study examines relative perceptions of effectiveness between students of differing academic abilities.

A questionnaire was administered to elicit students' views on whether they believed cooperative learning had enhanced their generic skills development. The data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics and Mann‐Whitney U tests of differences.

Students found the cooperative learning approach beneficial in developing their generic skills. Further, no significant differences were found between the perceptions of the less and more able students.

The study addresses perceptions of the benefits derived from cooperative learning rather than measuring benefits using an objective measure of achievement. Therefore, an interesting extension of this work would be to chart changes in personal development as a consequence of implementing cooperative learning over a number of years.

The findings provide some level of assurance for educators in accounting and other vocational disciplines that students of different academic abilities believe they have enhanced their generic skills as a result of engaging in cooperative learning.

This paper provides guidance to educators on establishing a cooperative learning environment and provides empirical evidence on its contribution to the enhancement of generic skills.