Search results

This paper aims to assess the effect of different leadership types, the client's identity and auditors' self-confidence on auditors' impartiality.

This paper is a descriptive-survey type, and the collected data are based on a predesigned questionnaire distributed in January 2020. The PLS software is used for data analysis, and the statistical population of this paper includes employed auditors in enlisted audit firms on the Official Association of Auditors. When the parameters were insignificant, the obtained probability from the model fitting was used for hypothesis testing, and the appropriateness of the model was assessed via the structural equations.

The results show a significant relationship between charismatic, transformational, participatory, delegating and bureaucratic leadership and auditors' impartiality. There is also an association between the client's identity and the auditor's impartiality. The client's identity mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and the auditor's impartiality. Moreover, there is a significant relationship between self-confidence and auditor's impartiality.

This paper enjoys an innovative method in the field of behavioural auditing. The effect of transformational leadership on auditor's impartiality with the mediatory role of the client's identity shows the in-depth client–auditor relationship has been taken for granted and not examined previously, so the results of this paper can lend a helping hand to audit firms to enhance the organisational performance.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the disciplinary orientation of scientific publications that were mentioned on different social media platforms, focussing on their differences and similarities with citation counts.

Social media metrics and readership counts, associated with 500,216 publications and their citation data from the Web of Science database, were collected from Altmetric.com and Mendeley. Results are presented through descriptive statistical analyses together with science maps generated with VOSviewer.

The results confirm Mendeley as the most prevalent social media source with similar characteristics to citations in their distribution across fields and their density in average values per publication. The humanities, natural sciences, and engineering disciplines have a much lower presence of social media metrics. Twitter has a stronger focus on general medicine and social sciences. Other sources (blog, Facebook, Google+, and news media mentions) are more prominent in regards to multidisciplinary journals.

This paper reinforces the relevance of Mendeley as a social media source for analytical purposes from a disciplinary perspective, being particularly relevant for the social sciences (together with Twitter). Key implications for the use of social media metrics on the evaluation of research performance (e.g. the concentration of some social media metrics, such as blogs, news items, etc., around multidisciplinary journals) are identified.