Awareness Level of Professional Independence Requirements, through Assimilation of Fundamental Principles of Professional Ethics, by Jordanian CPA Auditors, in Auditing Process: Field Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research paper aimed at determining Awareness Level of Professional Independence Requirements (ALOPIR), through assimilation of fundamental principles of professional ethics, by Jordanian CPA auditors, in auditing process. A questionnaire was established and developed for this purpose and given out to external Jordanian audit firms and CPA auditors, the number of questionnaires which were exposed to analysis was (40), extracted data was analyzed using (SPSS), and a number of statistical tests; was achieved. The study found positive correlation relationships between the stated variables; (high positive correlation between “professional competence and due care, professional behavior, safeguards threats”; moderate positive correlation between “objectivity, confidentiality”; low positive correlation between “integrity” and (ALOPIR)), Despite the fact that the results indicate to the existence of certain (ALOPIR) by Jordanian CPA auditors; yet the low and moderate correlation of some variables may emerge a sign that the auditors awareness of some independence concepts is still below the demanded level; as the correlation was low with integrity and moderate with objectivity and confidentiality, such a matter must be paid more attention. The low positive correlation between integrity and (ALOPIR) can be explained by the probable that auditors may predominant their financial interests than to achieve integrity and honesty; this may be due to the absence of a declared Ethics Charter of audit in Jordan. A standardized mean test was done to accept or reject either the null hypothesis or the alternative hypothesis, according to a comparison between each of the variables’ joint mean and the standardized one, following that it was possible to descending sorting of the hypotheses depending on the joint mean value. A main recommendation was introduced which is: to take steps to achieve imminent, deep and effectively spreading of relative culture, especially the fundamental principles of professional ethics, among professional accountants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".