THE AUDITOR SELF-EFFICACY SCALE: MEASURING CONFIDENCE IN TECHNICAL SKILLS, TECHNOLOGICAL ADAPTATION, AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION
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 auditing profession's complexity and high-stakes nature necessitates a nuanced understanding of auditors' self-efficacy, which significantly influences their performance, decision-making quality, audit quality, and fraud detection capabilities. Recognizing a gap in the domain-specific measurement of self-efficacy within this field, this study introduces the Auditor Self-Efficacy (ASE) scale, developed in alignment with Bandura's social cognitive theory. The ASE scale, consisting of three subscales—Technical Skills, Technological Adaptation, and Interpersonal Communication—aims to capture auditors' confidence across key competencies in auditing. This research involved 593 auditors who used an online survey to validate the scale. The findings indicated moderate to high levels of self-efficacy among the participants, with satisfactory internal consistency across the subscales. Confirmatory factor analysis affirmed the structural integrity and validity of the scale, with excellent model fit indices and significant factor loadings. The scale's discriminant validity was also established, highlighting its ability to differentiate between various dimensions of self-efficacy in auditing. The ASE scale's development fills a significant gap in the literature and offers practical implications for enhancing auditors' professional development and organizational capacity building. By providing a detailed measure of auditors' confidence across key competencies, the ASE scale facilitates a deeper understanding of their role and contributions to the auditing profession, paving the way for future research and practice to improve audit quality and efficiency in the evolving financial landscape. Keywords: Auditor Self-Efficacy, Auditing Competencies, Technical Skills in Auditing, Technological Adaptation in Auditing, Interpersonal Communication in Auditing, Social Cognitive Theory, Professional Development in Auditing, Audit Quality, Decision-Making in Auditing, Fraud Detection.
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 | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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