Moderating the role of top management commitment in usage of computer-assisted auditing techniques
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of computer-assisted auditing techniques (CAATs) is widely acknowledged by auditors. However, the current usage of CAATs is not as broad as expected. In this work, the technology–organization–environment framework is used to establish and analyze the organizational factors affecting the post-adoption usage of CAATs. This study also determines whether or not the use of CAATs enhances the audit process. Top management commitment is introduced as a variable that moderates audit firms’ use of CAATs and audit performance. The data used in this work were obtained from auditors of audit firms in Jordan. Analysis results reveal that CAAT usage is affected by the cost–benefit of technology, firm size, readiness and competitive pressure. By contrast, technology compatibility and the complexity of the accounting information systems of clients do not appear to influence CAAT usage. Top management directly influences audit performance and is thus crucial in dictating how auditors utilize CAATs. However, it does not exert a moderating effect (top management × audit firm’s use of CAATs) between audit firms’ use of CAATs and audit performance. Moreover, the use of CAATs improves the overall audit process of audit firms.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it