The Influence of Professional Skepticism, Auditor Knowledge and Client Pressure on Audit Quality during the Covid-19 Pandemic (an Empirical Study of Public Accounting Firms in East Jakarta Registered with IAPI)

Abstract

Purpose – This study examines the effect of professional skepticism, auditor knowledge and client pressure on audit quality among auditors working in public accounting firms in East Jakarta during the Covid-19 pandemic, a period in which audit engagements were conducted predominantly under remote and physically restricted conditions. Design/methodology/approach – Primary data were collected through a self-administered questionnaire distributed to auditors employed by public accounting firms in East Jakarta that are registered with the Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Accountants (IAPI). Purposive sampling was applied using three inclusion criteria: current employment in an East Jakarta public accounting firm, a minimum of one year of audit experience, and a minimum undergraduate (S1) qualification. Of the 103 questionnaires returned, 76 satisfied the criteria and were complete, and these were analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS 3.0. Findings – Professional skepticism and client pressure exert a statistically significant influence on audit quality (t = 4.215, p = 0.000 and t = 3.051, p = 0.002 respectively), whereas auditor knowledge does not (t = 1.140, p = 0.255). Professional skepticism yields the largest path coefficient in the model, indicating that during a period of crisis and remote auditing an auditor's attitudinal disposition contributes more to audit quality than technical knowledge considered in isolation. Originality/value – The study integrates agency theory and attribution theory into a single behavioural auditing framework in which an internal attribution (professional skepticism), a competence-based resource (auditor knowledge) and an external attribution (client pressure) are modelled simultaneously, and it tests that framework on primary data obtained from practising auditors while remote auditing was a necessity rather than a choice. In doing so it extends the behavioural auditing literature from stable engagement settings to crisis settings. Practical implications – The findings suggest that audit firms responding to disruption should invest in reinforcing skeptical judgement and in structural safeguards against client influence, rather than relying on technical training alone.