A Systematic Review of Experimental Research on Accountability in Auditing

Abstract

ABSTRACT Accountability research in auditing has spanned several decades, highlighting its importance in better understanding auditors’ judgments and decision-making processes. This study provides a systematic review of experimental audit research on accountability. We identify how previous research findings relate to theory, offer design considerations for future research, and provide future research opportunities. Relevant research was identified utilizing two databases. After removing duplicate records and applying exclusion criteria, a final population of 47 manuscripts is included in this review. We find that prior research results largely align with Tetlock’s social contingency model of accountability. This research stream is ripe with opportunities to enhance our understanding of accountability in auditing. Avenues for future research include investigating auditors’ responses to multiple accountability pressures, developing a measure of accountability, better understanding accountability in a post-COVID work environment, and considering ways to improve audit quality by shifting from a punitive to a more rewards-based system. Data Availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the database sources cited in the text.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.