The Influence of Professional Commitment and Rationalization-Discrediting Interventions on Unethical Audit Decisions

Abstract

Individuals often engage in rationalizing to self-justify contemplated questionable conduct. Recognizing that some individuals may be more prone to rationalize than others, we first identify an important subset of professional auditors that is more prone to rationalize: those with low professional commitment. We then examine three interventions whose purpose is to moderate rationalization effects among this auditor subset. Our first two interventions attempt to mitigate one’s ability to rationalize by highlighting the false premises of specific, common rationalizations previously identified. Our third intervention is broader in scope as it attempts to bolster participants’ overall self-regulation processes. Our results confirm that auditors with low (high) professional commitment are more (less) likely to rationalize unethical conduct. Further, among those with low professional commitment, our first two interventions were effective in reducing unethical intentions. The third intervention, however, was not effective. Implications of these results and suggestions for future research are also discussed.