The Influence of Work Overload, Time Pressure and Social Influence Pressure on Auditors’ Job Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auditing is considered a stressful occupation as the job is always characterized by heavy workloads, many deadlines, time pressure, social pressure and commitment towards the organization. Public auditors are often under pressure to produce quality audit, and yet may be under serious work pressure or continually dealing with auditees in stressful situations. Work stress faced by public auditors also may lead to mental and physical distress which resulted to decrease in job performance. This study examines which potential factors of pressure that have a significant relationship to government auditors’ job performance. Factors to be test in this study are work overload, time pressure and social influence pressure. This current study contributes information and ideas to the management and academician in the theoretical and practical aspects. The respondents in this study are 203 government auditorsfrom government auditors in National Audit Department of Malaysia. The result of this study shows that there is no significant relationship on work overload to auditors’ job performance. However the result of this study found that factor of time pressure shown a positive significant relation on auditors’ job performance, while social influence pressure shown a negative significant relationship on auditors’ job performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".