ABSTRACT
This study assesses the moderating effect of dark personality traits on the relationship between the conditioning factors of the theory of planned behavior and auditors' judgment and decision-making. A survey-type study was conducted, and 311 auditors' responses were analyzed using partial least-squares multi-group analysis. The results indicate that dark personality traits negatively impact the relationship between subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and auditors' judgment and decision-making, suggesting auditors with high dark traits are inclined to insensitivity, impulsiveness, and manipulation. As for the attitude of skepticism, dark personality traits positively impacted the relationship between skepticism and auditors' judgment. Our study contributes by developing a model incorporating the moderating effect of personality traits on the theory of planned behavior, helping auditing firms and regulatory bodies to improve processes and strengthen the reliability of accounting information.
Keywords: judgment and decision-making, audit, theory of planned behavior, Dark personality traits, Dark Tetrad.
RESUMO
Esta pesquisa analisa o efeito moderador dos traços de personalidade sombria na relação entre os fatores condicionantes da Teoria do Comportamento Planejado e o julgamento e tomada de decisão dos auditores. A partir de uma pesquisa do tipo survey, foram analisadas 311 respostas de auditores, utilizando a análise multigrupos nos mínimos quadrados parciais. Os resultados indicam que os traços de personalidade sombria infuenciam negativamente a relação entre as normas subjetivas, o controle comportamental percebido e o julgamento e tomada de decisão, sugerindo que auditores com elevados traços de personalidade sombria manifestam tendências à insensibilidade, impulsividade e manipulação. Por outro lado, tais traços potencializam a infuência do ceticismo sobre esse julgamento. A contribuição deste estudo está na criação de um modelo que incorpora o efeito moderador dos traços de personalidade na Teoria do Comportamento Planejado, fornecendo evidências às frmas de auditoria e entidades reguladoras para melhoria de processos e fortalecimento da confabilidade das informações contábeis.
Palavras-chave: julgamento e tomada de decisão, auditoria, Teoria do Comportamento Planejado, traços de personalidade sombria, tétrade sombria.
RESUMEN
Esta investigación analiza el efecto moderador de los rasgos oscuros de la personalidad en la relación entre los factores condicionantes de la teoría del comportamiento planifcado y el juicio y la toma de decisiones de los auditores. Mediante una encuesta, se analizaron 311 respuestas de auditores, utilizando el análisis multigrupo en mínimos cuadrados parciales. Los resultados indican que los rasgos oscuros de personalidad infuyen negativamente en la relación entre las normas subjetivas y el control conductual percibido y el juicio y la toma de decisiones, lo que sugiere que auditores con altos rasgos oscuros de personalidad manifestan tendencias hacia la insensibilidad, impulsividad y manipulación. Tales rasgos aumentan la infuencia del escepticismo en el juicio y la toma de decisiones. La contribución de este estudio es la creación de modelo que incorpora el efecto moderador de los rasgos de personalidad sobre la teoría del comportamiento planifcado, proporcionando información para que frmas de auditoría y entidades reguladoras mejoren los procesos y la confabilidad de la información contable.
Palabras clave: juicio y toma de decisiones, auditoría, teoría del comportamiento planifcado, rasgos de personalidad oscura, tríada oscura.
INTRODUCTION
The auditor's opinion is of great importance for stakeholders in their transactions and fundamental to the proper functioning of the financial market. However, auditing involves an array of situations requiring judgment and decision-making, and the auditor's choices are crucial to the quality and reliability of accounting reports (Bonner, 2008).
In research, professional judgment and decision-making (referred to in the international literature as JDM) have often been viewed through the lens of psychology and investigated based on personality traits and behavioral theories, in which decision-making is analyzed not only from the perspective of rational deliberation but also as a cognitive elaboration of the individual (Nelson & Tan, 2005).
The theory of planned behavior (TPB) proposed by leek Ajzen (1991) has garnered much attention in the specialized literature as a tooi of decision and behavior analysis. The theory holds that the immediate determinant of behavior is intention, which in turn is shaped by three core components: attitude (ATT), subjective norms (SN), and perceived behavioral control (PBC).
TPB's conditioning factors can directly impact behavior, whether mediated by intention or not (Ajzen, 1991), amply justifying an in-depth investigation of the influence of these conditioning factors on auditors' JDM.
Bazerman (1994) states that JDM, in all its complex stages, does not depend solely on a systematic understanding of the factors established by the TPB but also on carefully observing personality traits. Empirical studies have demonstrated that personality traits have significant explanatory and predictive effects on each dimension of the TPB (Kusumawati et al, 2022, Wang et al, 2021; Wilson et al, 2016).
Among the constructs proposed for the investigation of personality traits is the so-called Dark Tetrad (D4) (Paulhus, 2014), which rests upon the literature of social psychology and the subclinical personality traits present in the general population. The components of the D4 are Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism (Paulhus, 2014). Individuals with strong D4 traits are essentially callous, with a tendency for social malice, self-promotion, emotional aridity, duplicity, and brutality (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), making them prone to opportunistic and unethical behaviors, white-collar crimes, and corporate tax evasion, especially in the corporate setting (D'Souza, 2016; Harrison et al., 2018; Johnson et al., 2013).
Most authors have focused on the negative implications of dark personality traits for business and society (D'Souza et al, 2018; Góis et al, 2020; Harrison et al, 2018), while others believe the phenomenon has a negative and a complementary positive side (Kerckhofs et al, 2024).
Among the positive aspects, narcissists are associated with vision, charisma, innovation, and effective leadership, attributes associated with organizational success (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007; Jones & Paulhus, 2014). Psychopaths often exhibit creativity, communication skills, and strategie thinking that facilitate decision-making (Babiak et al, 2010; D'Souza, 2016). Machiavellians have good adaptability and strategie management skills, cooperating prosocially when necessary (D'Souza & Lima, 2015; Jones & Paulhus, 2014).
Auditors with D4 traits may have an advantage when seeking high positions in audit firms due to their strategie dynamism and corporate performance (Babiak et al, 2010; Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007; Jones & Paulhus, 2014). However, once an auditor has secured a leadership position, traits like impulsiveness, manipulation, grandiosity, and callousness (Jones & Paulhus, 2014) can severely compromise JDM quality.
In view of the role played by personality traits in predicting and explaining behavior (Kusumawati et al, 2022; Wang et al, 2021; Wilson et al, 2016) and decision-making (Spain et al, 2014), and based on empirical studies showing personality traits modulating TPB conditioning factors (Farrukh et al, 2018; Li & Ruzicka, 2022; Sebastin & Trisnawati, 2023), it may be assumed that dark personality traits can have positive and negative impacts on the relationship between TPB conditioning factors and auditors' JDM.
Thus, the main purpose of this study was to evaluate the moderating effect of dark personality traits on the relationship between TPB conditioning factors and auditors' JDM.
We also performed a descriptive analysis of the auditors' dark personality traits to characterize the study sample and determine the auditors' level of dark personality traits (low, moderate, high). This procedure allowed us to evaluate the ability of such traits to predict an individual's proneness to display dark behavior in the business environment (Majors, 2015).
We adopted the TPB, a framework widely employed in behavioral studies (Ajzen, 2005; Kusumawati et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2021). In the field of auditing, the TPB has been used to identify dysfunctional behaviors among auditors in various situations and perspectives, such as the conflict between clients and independent accountants and auditors (Tan et al., 2015), auditors' intention to report errors (Chadegani et al., 2015), auditors' decision to share knowledge (Cheng, 2017), the circumstances under which auditors subordinate their judgment (Cyr et al., 2020), and the auditees' intention to implement audit recommendations (Rahandiani et al., 2024).
The TPB may also be used to study auditors' behaviors in a more general sense, e.g., when meeting professional requirements or making decisions about materiality, types of opinion, and evidence of going concern-aspects that can improve the quality, relevance, and usefulness of accounting information. However, although the TPB's ability to predict a wide spectrum of behaviors is well documented, to our knowledge the framework has not yet been used to study auditors' JDM in empirical settings.
The framework adopted in this study employs the variable 'personality trait,' previously analyzed concerning JDM in auditing (Góis et al., 2020; Hobson et al., 2020; Jayson, 2020; Nezami et al., 2020; Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022). However, no other study appears to have used D4 as a moderator in the context of auditing and auditors' JDM. In other words, this investigation innovates by identifying the interactive effect of these factors on JDM.
Our study sheds light on how personality traits influence auditors' JDM in the context of the TPB. It also provides guidance for audit firms and regulatory bodies on what drives auditors in their judgments, helping audit firms and government agencies identify cognitive biases in auditing and creating control mechanisms to improve JDM quality and the reliability of financial reports, benefiting the capital market.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND STUDY HYPOTHESES Judgment and decision-making
Judgment and decision-making, as a research subfield of behavioral accounting, was introduced in the 1960s. Studies in the field have since focused on identifying and explaining factors contributing to each step of the process, from judgment to decision (Jayson, 2020; Trotman et al, 2015).
Judgment is the result of ideas, beliefs, or estimates about specific objects, events, states, or phenomena. On the other hand, decision-making follows judgment and involves a rationalized choice between alternatives, usually informed by factors like risk and profit (Bonner, 2008).
In recent years, JDM research has turned to the study of the impact of auditors' personal traits and work environment on JDM quality (Bonner, 2008), incorporating assorted psychological concepts and theories (Birnberg et al, 2007), as in Góis et al. (2020), Harrison et al. (2018), Hobson et al. (2020), Jayson (2020), Kerckhofs et al. (2024), Nezami et al. (2020), and Schlueter and Ratzinger-Sakel (2022).
In this study, JDM is represented by the assignment of materiality (Nelson & Tan, 2005), the reporting of key audit marters (KAMs) (Pinto & Morais, 2019), and evidence of going concern (Nelson & Tan, 2005), all of which involve a high degree of subjectivity (Nelson & Tan, 2005). Decisions about these aspects involve complex judgments on the part of auditors and may be influenced by cognitive biases and environmental factors. So far, little research has been conducted to clarify these relationships, especially in light of the TPB.
The TPB has gained prominence due to its extensive use in academie research (Kusumawati et al, 2022; Rahandiani et al, 2024; Wang et al, 2021) as it offers a comprehensive and empirically validated approach to behavioral analysis (Ajzen, 1991). lts ability to integrate cognitive, social, and behavioral aspects (Ajzen, 2005) provides a deeper understanding of the influences shaping behavior, making it more useful than most competing theories focusing on isolated aspects of human behavior, such as the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), which ignores perceived behavioral control, and the Rational Model of Decision-Making, which assumes individuals are perfectly rational and capable of analyzing all relevant information objectively.
Moreover, the TPB provides a flexible framework to which variables such as personality traits may be added without loss of theoretical integrity, thereby allowing comprehensive investigations of human behavior.
Theory of planned behavior
TPB explains individual behaviors in the face of an action. The theory was proposed by Ajzen (1991) as a spinoff of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). It was originally developed by Fishbein (1967) and later used by Ajzen (1991) as a foundation for the
TPB. The latter posits that intention is the immediate determinant of an individual's behavior and considers intention to be informed by three core components: attitude toward behaviors (ATT), subjective norms (SN), and perceived behavioral control (PBC).
Attitude may be defined as a general assignment of favorability (negative to positive) concerning an observed behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Ajzen (1991) also asserts that attitude associates the individual's interest in a given behavior with the expected results.
Attitude is used in auditing as a concept to improve the quality of the audit. One of the most important auditor attitudes is professional skepticism (Nolder & Kadous, 2018). Thus, to make high-quality judgments and decisions, auditors must remain skeptical of the audit evidence and information provided by their clients (Hurtt, 2010; Kusumawati et al, 2022).
Stating that professional skepticism should be viewed as a multidimensional construct, Hurtt (2010) identified six characteristics of professional skepticism, three of which are relevant to audit practices: a questioning mind, suspension of judgment, and search for knowledge.
Thus, professional skepticism is like an instinct compelling auditors to suspect possible errors and irregularities and to investigate distortions to influence their JDM and the quality of their services (Nolder & Kadous, 2018).
Subjective norms refer to social pressure with regard to a given judgment or decision (Ajzen, 1991). This involves external influences from regulatory agencies (e.g., Ibracon, CVM, CFC), codes of professional ethics (Federal Board of Accounting [CFC], 2014a, 2014b), and professional auditor guidelines (CFC, 2019; Schipper, 2003). Auditors are advised to adopt an impartial stance and preserve their independence to ensure or raise the quality of their services (CFC, 2019). Adherence to ethical norms and time-tested guidelines favor auditors' JDM and, thus, the quality of audit reports (Fan et al, 2013).
Perceived behavioral control refers to the auditor's perceived ease or difficulty in making a given judgment or decision (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Ajzen (1991) observed that the more resources and opportunities individuals perceive themselves to have, the greater their ability to control their behavior. In auditing, PBC reflects the knowledge, allowing the auditor to control and make quality judgments and decisions (Bonner, 2008). This knowledge is defined by Alavi and Leidner (2001) as information combined with experience, context, interpretation, and reflection.
Individuals with extensive knowledge are reportedly more likely to retrieve such resources and bring them to bear on JDM (Bonner, 2008), indicating that knowledge affects the quality of auditors' JDM. According to Bonner (2008), knowledge of different types is positively associated with JDM quality, depending on the audit task. Thus, both declarative and procedural knowledge contribute to JDM quality.
Following this short review of the main behavioral determinants of the TPB, we take a conceptual look at the dark personality traits that potentially moderate the relationship between these behavioral determinants and auditors' JDM.
The dark tetrad of personality traits
The determinants of the TPB are influenced by a set of factors, including personality traits (Ajzen, 1991). As documented elsewhere, personality traits play a crucial role in the behavior of decision-makers (Lotfi et al, 2016).
Empirical studies have revealed a close relationship between personality traits and the TPB, supporting the notion that these traits have significant predictive power in each dimension of the TPB (Kusumawati et al, 2022; Wang et al, 2021; Wilson et al, 2016). Furthermore, some empirical evidence points to personality traits as moderating variables of the TPB (Farrukh et al, 2018; Li & Ruzicka, 2022; Sebastin & Trisnawati, 2023).
Assuming that personality traits are intrinsic to the individual (D'Souza, 2016) and precede behavior (Lotfi et al, 2016), we hypothesized that dark personality traits could moderate the relationship between ATT, SN, PBC, and auditors' JDM.
The construct of D4, with its four non-pathological traits (narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism, sadism) (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), has received much attention from academies as an instrument for identifying behaviors compatible with self-promotion, emotional insensibleness, duplicity, aggressiveness, and antisocial thinking (Paulhus & Williams, 2002).
The four dark personality traits could be briefly defined thus: narcissism is characterized by grandiosity, self-display, self-glorification, vanity, and attention seeking; Machiavellianism is an aptitude for manipulation, cynicism, and scheming; psychopathy often presents as superficial charisma combined with impulsiveness and inability to feel guilt or remorse; and sadism is the enjoyment of cruel treatment and suffering in others and bragging about predatory sexual behavior (Silva et al, 2020). The D4 traits share the qualities of insensibleness, dishonesty, lack of empathy, and manipulation (D'Souza, 2016).
The D4 is a construct of subclinical personality traits, which, though conceptually distinct, overlap in actual experience (D'Souza, 2016). They are commonly observed in the general population and are well documented in the social psychology literature. Individuals with strong D4 traits are essentially callous, with a tendency for social malice, self-promotion, emotional aridity, duplicity, and brutality (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), making them prone to opportunistic behaviors and fraud, especially in the corporate setting (Babiak et al, 2010; D'Souza, 2016; D'Souza & Lima, 2015). Paulhus and Williams (2020) observed that D4 traits can have both desirable and undesirable social implications in business environments.
In the corporate environment, the undesirable implications of narcissism include selfistmess, overrating their own skills, and power and attention seeking. Arrogance produces a culture of self-admiration and contempt for others (Campbell et al., 2011; Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007). Psychopaths in leadership positions are manipulative, power-focused, and oblivious to the common good, thereby threatening business performance (Babiak et al, 2010). Machiavellians, focusing on manipulation and control, seek leadership positions to exert power, ignoring ethical and moral standards (D'Souza & Lima, 2015). Sadism is a predominant desire to humiliate and inflict suffering on others and is associated with unethical behavior (Trémolière & Djeriouat, 2016).
Despite the negative connotation of dark personality traits, some authors have also identified a positive side (D'Souza et al, 2018). In their perception, narcissists are associated with vision, charisma, innovation, and effective leadership (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007; Jones & Paulhus, 2014). Psychopaths display creativity, communication skills, and strategie thinking (Babiak et al, 2010; D'Souza, 2016), while Machiavellians excel at adaptability and strategie management skills (D'Souza & Lima, 2015; Jones & Paulhus, 2014). These qualities are believed to favor decision-making and organizational performance in certain settings.
Auditing studies exploring the relationship between dark personality traits and JDM have found significant associations with a range of dysfunctional audit practices, such as premature sign-off of audit procedures, accepting weak explanations from clients, concealing information that should be highlighted in audit reports, failing to investigate questionable items, superficial reviews of cliënt documents, fraud, unjustified trust, and compromising auditor independence and skepticism (Góis et al, 2020; Harrison et al, 2018; Hobson et al, 2020; Margal & Alberton, 2020; Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022), pointing to their negative influence on JDM and audit quality.
Therefore, it may be assumed that auditors with dark personalities are more likely to engage in fraudulent reporting and more susceptible to the temptation of serving their own interests (Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022) while ignoring the attitude of professional skepticism (Kusumawati et al., 2022; Margal & Alberton, 2020; Sebastin & Trisnawati, 2023) and independence recommended by the codes of ethics (Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022). Using their knowledge in this manner (Cheng, 2017; Lotfi et al., 2016) to make judgments and decisions, they seriously compromise the quality of their audits (Harrison et al., 2018; Hobson et al., 2020; Nezani et al., 2020). Based on these considerations, we formulated the following study hypotheses:
H1: High dark personality traits have a negative effect on the relationship between ATT and auditors' JDM with regard to the assignment of materiality (Hla), evidence of going concern (Hlb), and reporting of KAMs (Hlc).
H2: High dark personality traits have a negative effect on the relationship between SN and auditors' JDM with regard to the assignment of materiality (H2a), evidence of going concern (H2b), and reporting of KAMs (H2c).
H3: High dark personality traits have a negative effect on the relationship between PBC and auditors' JDM with regard to the assignment of materiality (H3a), evidence of going concern (H3b), and reporting of KAMs (H3c).
Figure 1 summarizes the study design and the relationships between the constructs.
METHODS
In October 2020, a questionnaire was e-mailed to all the auditors (n=989) affiliated with the Institute of Independent Auditors of Brazil (Ibracon). The full questionnaire is available at https:// drive.google.com/file/d/lYE0My-A_tmiAeflW5CCrbQMMWkMhp_M9/view?usp=sharing. The instrument was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Federal University of Ceara (CAAE #43017520.7.0000.5055).
Between lOJanuaryand 15 November 2021, 320 responses were received, 9 of which were excluded due to incompleteness, resulting in a final sample of 311 respondents. The instrument was pre-tested on 10 members of Ibracon (lst regional chapter) on 15 September 2020 to make linguistic, semantic, conceptual, and operational adjustments. The delay between the data collection and the final publication of the results is due to the time required to improve the text based on discussions on specialized forums.
The scales employed in this study were taken from previous studies and adapted (Asare, 1992; DeZoort et al, 2006; Fan et al, 2013; Hurtt, 2010; Jones & Paulhus, 2014; Plouffe et al, 2016) and have therefore been duly tested and validated internally and extemally. They were then backtranslated (English/Portuguese) and validated by a certified linguist.
Initially, descriptive statistics of the auditors' personality traits were carried out to draw a profile of the traits in the sample. The 'Dark Tetrad' was defined by calculating Pearson coefficients and confirming the correlations with the personality traits, foliowed by factor analysis.
We measured the average level of each trait for each individual and the group. We then divided the group into tertiles (low, moderate, high) to determine the predisposition toward engagement in dark behaviors in the business environment. The method is widely used in accounting (Majors, 2015; Silva et al, 2020) and psychology research (Jones & Paulhus, 2014; Paulhus & Williams, 2002), and makes it possible to test for moderation in structural equation models. This was expected to reveal potential differences between the levels of dark personality traits.
We used structural equation modeling to validate the model established a priori from the relationships between the constructs. To test the study hypotheses, we used partial least-squares multi-group analysis (PLS-MGA) and the product indicator approach proposed by Hair et al. (2005).
Subsequently, to validate the a priori established model of relationships between the constructs formed by multiple indicators, including exogenous and endogenous constructs, we employed these structural equation models, one for each JDM scenario (materiality, going concern, and key audit marters).
A measurement model was created for each construct, in which the relationships between the latent variable and the scale items were specified. These relationships were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis, construct by construct, evaluating reliability and convergent validity with the procedures of Fornell and Larcker (1981). As suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981), reliability was evaluated with Cronbach's Alpha coefficients and composite reliability (CR).
Convergent validity was measured using the average variance extracted (AVE) (Hair et al, 2005), foliowed by discriminant validity analysis with the Fornell-Larcker criterion.
The validity of the structural model, including an analysis of predictive capabilities and the relationships between the constructs, was determined in five steps: (1) assessment of collinearity by calculating the variance inflation factor (VIF); (2) evaluation of the R2 level of the latent variables; (3) assessment of the significance and relevance of the relationships; (4) assessment of F2 effect size; and (5) assessment of the Q2 prediction capacity.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Descriptive statistics
The predominant dark personality trait of the auditors participating in the study was Machiavellianism (average: 6.02; maximum: 9.40). Professionals with marked traits of Machiavellianism are described as manipulative, self-interested strategists, and inclined to adopt questionable tactics to achieve business goals and personal gains (Jones & Paulhus, 2014).
Narcissism was the second-most common dark trait among the respondents (average: 5.47; maximum: 8.80). Individuals with narcissistic traits tend to display an invasive pattern of grandiosity, a need for admiration, and a lack of empathy associated with self-glorification and vanity (D'Souza et al, 2018). This result is compatible with Hardies et al. (2024), who concluded Machiavellianism and narcissism are predominant traits among auditors. In contrast, sadism yielded the lowest scores among the dark traits (average: 2.69; maximum: 5.47), supporting the findings of Góis et al. (2020).
Table 3 shows the levels of dark personality traits categorized as low, moderate, and high.
When the auditors were segregated by level, psychopathy (54.0%) and sadism (57.5%) were predominant at the low level, indicating a predisposition for these traits among auditors. According to Spain et al. (2014), the two traits are common at low levels, as observed in our study, having few consequences for the business environment.
At the moderate level, most auditors had Machiavellian (50.8%) and narcissistic (63.3%) personalities, suggesting a predominance of these traits among auditors at the moderate level and matching the fmdings of D'Souza (2016), who observed moderate levels of Machiavellianism (38%) and psychopathy (41.1%) in a sample of Brazilian managers.
At the high level, Machiavellianism was the most common trait (22.8%), foliowed by narcissism (16.7%). Likewise, Silva et al. (2020) identified Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy at high levels.
Interestingly, sadism displayed the lowest average among the four personality traits, suggesting it is a relatively uncommon trait among auditors.
Initially, Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated (Table 4) to confirm the association between the four dark traits.
Matching the literature, each trait was found to be moderately correlated with the others, having a set of characteristics in common (Jones & Paulhus, 2014).
Since our study hypotheses were focused on the shared core of the four dark personality traits rather than on individual measures, we conducted a factor analysis to group the four traits and build the variable 'Dark Tetrad,' as proposed by Jones and Paulhus (2014) and Paulhus and Williams (2002). The results are presented in Table 5.
The result of Bartlett's test of sphericity (KMO=0.821) indicated the feasibility of conducting a factor analysis of dark personality traits. A single variable was generated, with a shared variance proportion to create a factor corresponding to 60.18%. Subsequently, we grouped the traits into one factor divided by the respective tertiles to define three ranges (low, moderate, and high) for the moderation test.
Validation of the measuring model
The robustness of the measuring model was confirmed by performing two reliability tests (Cronbach's alpha and CR) and two validity tests (AVE and the Fornell-Larcker criterion). According to Hair et al. (2005), indicators with weak external loads (between 0.4 and 0.7) may be excluded if the reliability of the indicator is low and the exclusion of the indicator leads to a substantial increase in CR and AVE. To refrne the scales, we validated the constructs using confirmatory factor analysis, which identified items with a factor loading under 0.4 and no statistical significance. Thus, the items QM3, QM5, SJ8, SJ9, SK12, SK13, IA6, DK2, DK4, MAT2, MAT5, KAM2, KAM3, and KAM7 were excluded from the model.
We then conducted new tests (CR, Cronbach's alpha, and AVE) to evaluate the effects of the exclusion of items. With values matching the literature (Cronbach's alpha >0.70; CR >0.70; AVE >0.50), the tests confirmed the reliability and validity of the scales used to measure the constructs adopted in the study, as shown in Table 6.
Discriminant validity was established using cross-loadings and the Fornell-Larcker (1981) criterion, as illustrated in Table 7. The results show that the square roots of the AVEs were larger than the construct correlations, connrming the discriminant validity of our data.
Validity of the structural model
We then conducted a moderation test using partial least-squares multi-group analysis (PLS-MGA). The results are presented in Table 8). The approach proposed by Henseier et al. (2015) was chosen as it has been shown to provide the highest level of robustness in social studies employing PLS-MGA (Hair et al., 2005).
We initially found the three groups (low, moderate, and high) to be significant in associating ATT, SN, and PBC with auditors' JDM in all the models (materiality, going concern, and KAMs).
A similarity was observed in the results of the conditioning factors of the TPB and auditors' JDM with low and moderate levels of dark traits, suggesting that the moderate level reflects qualities of each trait desirable within the context of auditing, as opposed to the negative aspects.
It may be inferred that auditors with moderate dark traits are less prone to surrender their professional skepticism and independence and employ their expertise to make opportunistic judgments and decisions, compromising the audit quality.
Our findings match those of D'Souza et al. (2015), who concluded that moderate traits of psychopathy are more similar to low than high traits and that moderate traits of Machiavellianism are more similar to high than low traits, while narcissism showed no difference between the three levels. However, as pointed out by Furtner et al. (2011), when comparing the results of different studies, dark personality traits may be deemed undesirable or desirable depending on the cultural setting in which the study is conducted.
Our multigroup analysis revealed significant differences between the three models, with the insertion of dark personality traits as moderators between the low group and the high group and between the moderate group and the high group (p<0.05 in all cases) (Henseler et al, 2015). This suggests that high dark personality traits moderate the association between ATT, SN, PBC, and auditors' JDM,. However, moderation produces different effects on these relationships: positive for ATT vs. professional skepticism, negative for SN vs. ethical and professional codes, and for PBC vs. knowledge. Thus, our first set of hypotheses (Hla, Hlb, and Hlc) were rejected, whereas the second and third sets (H2a, H2h, Hlc, H3a, H3h, and H3c) were not.
When analyzed individually, the moderation of dark personality traits in the relationship between skepticism and JDM can be explained by the fact that auditors with high dark personalities exhibit socially aversive traits and are distrustful or emotionally detached in their relationships. In other words, they avoid unwarranted trust, even when dealing with clients (Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022), making them more skeptical in evaluating audit evidence, favoring their judgment and decision-making. This is likely driven by insensitivity and lack of empathy among auditors with high D4 traits, as reported by Hobson et al. (2020).
Our results for SN show that high dark personality traits in auditors moderate the relationship between SN and ethical/professional codes and auditors' JDM; in other words, a negative impact was observed on the relationship between SN and auditors' JDM.
Thus, because dark personality traits in auditors have a negative effect on SN (i.e., on perceived social pressure toward maintaining a stance of professional independence of mind and appearance), such traits are likely to influence the quality of auditors' JDM (Schipper, 2003).
Likewise, the literature shows that auditors with high dark personality traits are prone to engage in fmancial reporting fraud and are more inclined to serve their own interests (Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022), ignoring ethical and professional codes, compromising principles of independence of mind and appearance, and distorting their JDM for personal benefit.
In support of our findings, Schlueter and Ratzinger-Sakel (2022) reported that high dark personality traits often cause a disruptive impact on auditors' adherence to best practices of auditing, especially with regard to independence.
Studies on dark personality traits point to self-interest as the predominant motivating factor of behavior (Schlueter & Ratzinger-Sakel, 2022). As we have seen, Harrison et al. (2018) looked into the opportunistic behavior of dark personalities, as expressed by narcissists (believing their unethical acts and fraud will go unnoticed), Machiavellians (constantly searching for opportunities to deceive others), psychopaths (rationalizing fraudulent behaviors), and sadists (inflicting harm to control others socially and emotionally).
Furthermore, our results allow us to infer that high dark personality traits have a negative effect on the association between perceived behavioral control, knowledge, and auditors' JDM, suggesting that auditors with dark personalities tend to act self-interestedly and use their knowledge for fmancial manipulation (D'Souza, 2016) and opportunistic judgments (D'Souza & Lima, 2015), either through an incorrect definition of materiality, using a basis and a percentage of the company's assets, or through neglecting signs of operational and fmancial discontinuity and key audit matters.
Unsurprisingly, each dark personality trait has a strong inverse relationship with honesty and modesty (Lee & Ashton, 2005), and individuals who exhibit them are more likely to engage in selfish, unsensible, or unethical behaviors (Jones & Paulhus, 2014). Consequently, they are often associated with an increase in fraudulent activity (Lee et al, 2013) and other undesirable behaviors in the workplace (Spain et al, 2014).
This notion is consistent with Lee and Ashton (2005), who found all traits of the Dark Triad to be strongly and negatively correlated with the honesty-humility dimension, suggesting a greater predisposition toward opportunistic behaviors, unethical practices, fraud, and manipulation of accounting reports.
To deepen the analysis, moderation by type of personality trait was verified for the relationship between ATT, SN, and PBC, and JDM, using the 'product indicator' method. The results are presented in Table 9.
The moderating effect of Machiavellianism and psychopathy was similar to that of D4. On the other hand, narcissism did not moderate the relationship between PBC and KAM, and sadism did not moderate the relationship between ATT, PBC, and JDM. This shows that each dark personality trait influences the audit environment differently.
The observed positive associations confirm that Machiavellian individuals have poor emotional interaction and act autonomously, disregarding the opinion of others (Hurtt, 2010); narcissists have high self-esteem, a sense of superiority, and a questioning attitude (D'Souza et al, 2018); and psychopaths are impulsive, egocentric, lack empathy, and are emotionally inadequate (Jones & Paulhus, 2014). Such characteristics can influence auditor's professional skepticism and, consequently, their JDM. Our results match those of Margal and Alberton (2020).
As for the moderating effect of dark personality traits on the relationship between SN, PBC, and JDM, Machiavellians are viewed as cynical, lacking in principles, opportunist, dishonest, and manipulative (Paulhus & Williams, 2002); narcissists tend to be dishonest and unethical for their own personal benefit, and often overestimate their ability to get away with fraud (Harrison et al, 2018); psychopaths are extremely manipulative, amoral, opportunists, and will go to great lengths to achieve what they want, even if against the law (Paulhus, 2018). D'Souza (2016) observed that psychopaths indulge in distortions and omissions, ignoring precepts of the professional code of ethics, such as independence and the use of knowledge for adequate JDM and quality audits.
Sadism did not moderate the relationship between ATT, PBC, and JDM. This may be explained by the perception of Trémolière and Djeriouat (2016) that sadism is the only truly socially aversive dark personality trait in the sense that it offers no advantage in the quest for corporate success.
CONCLUSIONS
Dark personality traits are problematic psychological idiosyncrasies permeating individual behavior, which can explain a range of negative and positive attitudes displayed by leaders and employees in the business environment.
Our results strongly suggest that high dark personality traits moderate the relationship between ATT, SN, PBC, and auditors' JDM, though not necessarily in the same direction. Thus, the effect was positive for the conditioning factor ATT and negative for SN and PBC.
The fact that dark personality traits had a positive effect on auditors' professional skepticism, reflected in JDM of higher quality, highlights the ambiguous nature of D4 traits. It would seem that, while mostly regarded as detrimental to business and society, dark traits can sometimes favor judgment, depending on the context and task. The findings suggest that auditors with dark personality traits, characterized by socially aversive behaviors, emotional detachment, and heightened suspicion, also exhibit increased professional skepticism. This skepticism enhances their critical assessment of audit evidence and potentially favors their judgment and decision-making.
With respect to SN, the presence of dark personality traits had a negative impact on JDM quality, indicating that auditors with this profile employ JDM as a means to their own ends, compromising the reliability of their reports.
A similar negative effect on JDM was observed for PBC, indicating that auditors with high dark personality traits will often use their expertise to manipulate financial assessments and make opportunistic judgments and decisions.
The results suggest that auditors with high dark personality traits manifest tendencies toward insensitivity, impulsiveness, and manipulation and are more likely to disregard ethical codes and professional standards (SN), using their knowledge (PBC) for opportunistic purposes. This compromises the quality and integrity of audited financial statements and encourages auditors to engage in fraudulent reporting.
Unlike narcissism and sadism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy were found to have a moderating effect similar to that of the D4 construct. In other words, each of the four traits making up the D4 has a different influence on the audit environment. This may explain why sadism, the usefulness of which is dubious, is uncommon among auditors.
A better understanding of the factors influencing independent auditors' JDM, especially when dark personality traits are suspected, can help regulatory agencies assess the reliability of information disclosed by firms and, indirectly, strengthen capital markets, attracting investors and ensuring their permanence in the market.
Our study contributes to the literature by advancing and expanding the discussion on social and behavioral aspects associated with auditors' JDM, previously restricted to the fields of sociology and psychology, demonstrating the interdisciplinary connection between auditing and psychology and highlighting the complexity of human factors in the auditing process.
It is hoped that our study will subsidize research in the field and enrich the discussion on D4 as applied to auditors' JDM. Our results may also be useful when recruiting and selecting individuals for audit work by identifying personality traits and attitudes likely to impact decision-making, thereby potentially improving the composition of audit teams and the quality of audit reports.
Among this study's limitations are the restriction of the sampling universe to the Brazilian auditors affiliated with Ibracon and the period in which the questionnaire was administered, coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, despite the rigorous statistical procedures employed, the input was self-reported and, as such, subject to the bias of self-evaluation, considering that some individuals may be expected to deemphasize socially unacceptable behaviors.
Future investigations may expand the sampling universe to include, among others, auditors registered with the National Registry of Independent Auditors (CNAI). Also, the patterns of JDM observed in this study could be compared to those of auditors in other countries to identify potential similarities, divergencies, cultural factors, and market influences.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Process, 50, 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behaviour (2nd ed.). Open University Press.
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3250961
Asare, S. K. (1992). The auditor's going-concern decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review, 67(2), 379-393. http://www.jstor.org/stable/247731
Babiak, P., Neumann, C, & Hare, R. D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 28(2), 174-193. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.925
Bazerman, M. (1994). judgment in managerial decision making (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Birnberg, J. G., Luft, }., & Shields, M. D. (2007). Psychology theory in management accounting research. In Handbook of management accounting research (Vol. 1, pp. 113-136). Elsevier.
Bonner, S. E. (2008). judgment and decision making in accounting. Prentice Hall.
Bonner, S. E., & Walker, P. L. (1994). The effects of instruction and experience on the acquisition of auditing knowledge. Accounting Review, 69, 157-178. http://www.jstor.org/stable/248265
Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B.}., Campbell, S. M., & Marchisio, G. (2011). Narcissism in organizational contexts. Human Resource Management Review, 21(4), 268-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/]'. hrmr.2010.10.007.
Chadegani, A. A., Mohamed, Z. M., & Iskandar, T M. (2015). the influence of individual characteristics on auditors' intention to report errors. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3(7), 710-714. https://doi.org/10.7763/JOEBM.2015.V3.271
Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick. D. C. (2007). It's all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 351-386. https://doi.Org/10.2189/asqu.52.3.351
Cheng, X. (2017). Applying the theory of planned behavior to influence auditors' knowledge-sharing behavior. USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations, University of South Florida. https:// digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/6691
Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. (2014a). Normas brasileiras de contabilidade. Aplicagao geral aos profissionais da contabilidade (NBC PG 100).
Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. (2014b). Normas brasileiras de contabilidade. Contadores que prestam serviqos (NBC PG 200).
Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. (2019). Normas brasileiras de contabilidade. Independência para trahalho de auditoria e revisao. (NBC PA 400).
Cyr, D., Héroux, S., & Fontaine, R. (2020), "Auditors' judgment subordination and the theory of planned behavior". Managend Auditing Journal, 35(8),1189-1211. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-12-2018-2110
Dillard-Eggers, J. & Roberts, M. L. (2010). An efficiënt method for acquiring auditing procedural knowledge. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research, 13, 89-111. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1475-1488(2010)0000013008
D'Souza, M. F. (2016). Manobras financeiras e o Dark Triad: O despertar do lado somhrio na gestao (Tese de doutorado, Universidade de Sao Paulo), http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/12/12136/ tde-06052016-110703/
D'Souza, M. F., Aragao, I. R., & Luca, M. M. M. (2018). Analise da ocorrência de maquiavelismo e narcisismo no discurso nos relatórios administrativos de empresas envolvidas em escandalos fmanceiros. Revista de Educagao e Pesquisa em Contabilidade (REPeC), 12(3), 402-420. https://doi. org/10.17524/repec.vl2i3.1899
D'Souza, M. F., & Lima, G. A. S. F. (2015). The dark side of power: The Dark Triad in opportunistic decision-making. Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting, 8(2), 135-156. https://doi. org/10.2139/ssrn.2641799
DeZoort, T., Harrison, P., & Taylor, M. (2006). Accountability and auditors' materiality judgments: The effects of differential pressure strength on conservatism, variability, and effort. Accounting, Orgamzatwns and Society, 31(4-5), 373-390. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.aos.2005.09.001
Fan, Y. H., Woodbine, G., & Cheng, W. (2Q\3).Astudy ofAustralian and Chinese accountants' attitudes towards independence issues and the impact on ethical judgments. Asian Review of Accounting, 21(3), 205-222. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-04-2013-0027
Farrukh, M., Alzubi, Y., Shahzad, I. A, Waheed, A. & Kanwal, N. (2018). Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of personality traits in perspective of theory of planned behaviour. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 399-414. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-01-2018-0004
Fishbein, M. (1967). Attitude and the prediction of behavior. In M. Fishbein (Org.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 477-492). Wiley.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C, & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing, 18(1), 39-59. https:// doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Furtner, M. R., Rauthmann, J. F, & Sachse, P. (2011). The self-loving self-leader: An examination of the relationship between self-leadership and the dark triad. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39(3), 369-380. https://doi.Org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.3.369
Góis, A. D., Lima, G. A. S. F. D., & Luca, M. M. M. De. (2020). Everyday sadism in the business area. RAUSP Management Journal, 55(3), 393-408. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-03-2019-0048
Hair, }., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (2005). Andlise multivariada de dados. Bookman.
Hardies, K., Janssen, S., Vanstraelen, A., & Zehms, K. M. (2024). Using field-based evidence to understand the antecedents to auditors' skeptical actions. AUDITING: A Journal ofPractice ó Theory, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-2021-141
Harrison, A., Summers, }., & Mennecke, B. (2018). The effects of the dark triad on unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 153, 53-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0551-016-3368-3
Henseier, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/sll747-014-0403-8
Hobson, J. L., Stern, M. T, & Zimbelman, A. F. (2020). The benefit of mean auditors: The influence of social interaction and the Dark Triad on unjustified auditor trust. Contemp Account Res, 37, 1217-1247. https://doi.Org/10.l 111/1911-3846.12511
Hurtt, R. K. (2010). Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice 6 Theory, 29 (1), 149-171. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2010.29.L149
Jayson, V. H. (2020). An examination of the effects ofexperience and task complexity on audit judgment. Accounting and Business Research, 27(1), 41-50. https://sid.ir/paper/8257/en
Jiang, R. (2018). An Investigation of the Moral Intentions of Chinese Auditors: Conflicts Associated with Maintaining Independence in Auditor-cliënt Relationship Situations (Doctoral thesis. Curtin University). https://espace.curtin.edu.au/handle/20.500.11937/73576
Johnson, E.N.; Kuhn, J. R.; Apostolou, B. & Hassell, J.M. (2013). Auditor perceptions of cliënt narcissism as a fraud attitude risk factor. Auditing: a journal of theory ó practice, 32(1), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50329.
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the short dark triad (SD3) a brief measure of dark personality traits.Assessmenf, 21(1), 28-4J. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113514105
Kerckhofs, L., Vandenhaute, M. L., & Hardies, K. (2024). A systematic literature review on the bright and dark sides of auditors' personality. Maandblad voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie, 98(1), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.5117/mab.98.116510
Kusumawati, N. P A., Pramuki, N. M. W. A., & Pratiwi, N. P T W. (2022). Determinants of auditor's professional skepticism in collaborative theory of planned behaviorand triguna theory. American International Journal of Business Management, 5(3), 7-16.
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2005). Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism in the Five-Factor Model and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Individual differences, 38(7), 1571-1582. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.016
Lee, K., Ashton, M. C, Wiltshire, }., Bourdage, J. S., Visser, B. A., & Gallucci, A. (2013). Sex, power, and money: Prediction from the Dark Triad and Honesty-Humility. European journal of personality, 27(2), 169-184. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1860
Li, Y. & Ruzicka, M. (2022). The Big Five personality traits and theory of planned behavior in physical education students. Quality in Sport, 8(3), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.12775/QS.2022.08.03.001'
Lotfi, M., Muktar, S. N., Ologbo, A. C, & Chiedu, C. K. (2016). The influence of the Big-Five personality traits dimensions on knowledge sharing behaviour. Mediterranean journal of Social Sciences, 7(1), 241-250. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7nlslp241
Majors, T M. (2015). The interaction of communicating measurement uncertainty and the dark triad on managers' reporting decisions. The Accounting Review, 91(3), 973-992. https://doi.org/10.2308/ accr-51276
Margal, R. R., & Alberton, L. (2020). Relagao entre os tragos sombrios de personalidade e o ceticismo profissional dos auditores independentes. Revista de Educaqao e Pesquisa em Contabilidade (REPeC), 14(4), 480-500. https://doi.org/10.17524/repec.vl4i4.2663
Nelson, M., & Tan, H. T (2005). Judgment and decision-making research in auditing: A task, person, and interpersonal interaction perspective. Auditing: A journal of Practice ó Theory, 24(1), 41-71. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.761706
Nezami, A., Pourheydari, O., & Pakdaman, M. (2020). The effect of personality traits (conscience and agreeableness), feeling-thinking and risk-taking on auditor's judgment regarding the mediating role of self-efficacy. journal of Financial Accounting Knowledge, 7(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.30479/ jfak.2020.12315.2610
Nolder, C, & Kadous, K. (2018). The way forward on professional skepticism: Conceptualizing professional skepticism as an attitude. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 67, 1-14. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.03.010
Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Toward a taxonomy of dark personalities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(6), 421-426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414547737.
Paulhus, D. L. (2018). The Big Two dimensions of desirability. In A. E. Abele & B. Wojciszke (Eds.), Agency and communion in social psychology (pp. 79-89). Routledge
Paulhus, D. L., ó Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
Pinto, I., & Morais, A. I. (2019). What matters in disclosures of key audit matters: Evidence from Europe. journal of International Financial, Management ó Accounting, 30(2), 145-162. https://doi. org/lO.llll/jifm.12095
Plouffe, R., Saklofske, D., & Smith, M. (2016). The assessment of sadistic personality: Preliminary psychometrie evidence for a new measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 166-171. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.043
Rahandiani, D., Ritonga, I. T., & Imansantosa, P. (2024). Auditee's intention to implement audit recommendations: A qualitative study based on the theory of planned behavior. jumal Tata Kelola dan Akuntabilitas Keuangan Negara, 10(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.28986/jtaken.vl0il.1404
Schipper, K. (2003). Principles-based accounting standards. Accounting Horizons, 17(1), 61-72. https:// doi.org/10.2308/acch.2003.17.1.61
SchlueterJ. K.,& Ratzinger-Sakel, N. V. (2022). DarkTriadpersonalitytraits and auditor independence: A systematic literature review. (January 21, 2022). Available at SSRN, 1-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.4014690
Sebastin, I., & Trisnawati, E. (2023). Can personality type moderate the effect of auditor experience and time pressure on professional skepticism? jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti, 10(1), 83-98. http:// dx.doi.org/10.25105/jmat.vl0il.10781
Silva, A., Cunha, P. R., & D'Souza, M. F. (2020). Influência do Dark Tetrad de executivos no gerenciamento de resultados (Apresentagao de trabalho). 20a USP International Conference in Accounting, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP.
Spain, S. M., Harms, P. D., & Lebreton, J. M. (2014). The dark side of personality at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), 41-60. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1894
Tan, Y., Fan, Y. H., Woodbine, G., & Jiang, R. (2015). Using Ajzen's TPB model to explain the ethical intentions of Chinese accounting professionals. Academy of Taiwan Business Management Review, 11(3), 151-163.
Trémolière, B., ó Djeriouat, H. (2016). The sadistic trait predicts minimization of intention and causal responsihility in moral judgment. Cognition, 146, 158-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/]'. cognition.2015.09.014
Trotman, K. T, Bauer, T D., & Humphreys, K. A. (2015). Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 47, 56-72. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.aos.2015.09.004
Wang, Q. C, Chang, R., Xu, Q., liu, X., Jian, I. Y, Ma, Y T, & Wang, Y X. (2021). The impact of personality traits on household energy conservation behavioral intentions: An empirical study based on theory of planned behavior in Xi'an. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 43, 100949. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100949
Wilson, C, Woolfson, 1. M, Durkin, K., & Elliott, M. A. (2016). The impact of social cognitive and personality factors on teachers' reported inclusive behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 461-480. https://doi.org/10.llll/bjep.12118
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
AUTHORS* CONTRIBUTION
Lorena Costa de Oliveira Araujo: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, visualization, writing - original draft, writing - proofreading, and editing. Marcia Martins Mendes De Luca: Conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, visualization, writing - original draft, writing - proofreading, and editing. Paolo Giuseppe Lima de Araujo: Formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, visualization, writing - original draft writing - proofreading, and editing.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2025. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the"License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
This study assesses the moderating effect of dark personality traits on the relationship between the conditioning factors of the theory of planned behavior and auditors' judgment and decision-making. A survey-type study was conducted, and 311 auditors' responses were analyzed using partial least-squares multi-group analysis. The results indicate that dark personality traits negatively impact the relationship between subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and auditors' judgment and decision-making, suggesting auditors with high dark traits are inclined to insensitivity, impulsiveness, and manipulation. As for the attitude of skepticism, dark personality traits positively impacted the relationship between skepticism and auditors' judgment. Our study contributes by developing a model incorporating the moderating effect of personality traits on the theory of planned behavior, helping auditing firms and regulatory bodies to improve processes and strengthen the reliability of accounting information.