MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048641971 · doi:10.1108/maj-04-2019-2267

The effect of religiosity–morality interaction on auditor independence in Egypt

2020· article· en· W3048641971 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Mostafa, Mostaq M. Hussain, Ehab K. A. Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueManagerial Auditing Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditor independenceReligious orientationReligiosityIndependence (probability theory)AuditSocial psychologyAccountingPsychologyTest (biology)BusinessStatisticsInternal auditMathematicsJoint audit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to examine the effect of religiosity on the degree of auditor independence given the significance of symbolic gestures constructed by client economic conditions in different situations before and after considering the degree of auditors’ moral development. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses an experimental design based on running mixed factorial analysis of variance (SPANOVA) using mainly repeated measures GLM to test the interaction effects between (and within) variables on auditor independence. Findings The main findings indicate that there is a significant interactional effect between the degree of moral development and intrinsic religiosity on the degree of auditor independence, given the stimulating effect of the client’s economic gestures/conditions. Practical implications The Egyptian economy is growing and ensuring that auditor independence is paramount to sustaining the local, as well as foreign investors’ interest. Hence, this study is very important in highlighting factors that might lead to some impairment of auditors’ independence. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to test the interactional effect between the religious orientation rather than religious affiliation and moral development on the degree of auditor independence, such a relationship has not been tested before in the literature. Additionally and most importantly, it uses statistical measurement through its experimental design, as there is a lack of studies in terms of auditor independence in Egypt. The existing literature follows the perceptional assessment rather than the real measurement of the degree of auditor independence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagerial Auditing JournalSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207