Determinants of Audit Quality: An Analysis of Three Points of
International Standards on Auditing (ISA) and The Identity of The
Auditor As An Independent Accountant
Charis Subianto
Economics and Business Faculty, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia
Keywords: Audit Quality, Audit Risk, Independence, ISA, Professional Judgement, Skepticism.
Abstract: International Standards on Auditing (ISA) emphasize several points, particularly those related to auditor
behavior in audit assignment and the management of audit implementation. The discussion in this study
examines three points emphasized in the ISA, i.e. risk-based audit, auditor professional skepticism, and
auditor professional judgement, before undertaking a review of the identity of the auditor as an independent
accountant, i.e. auditor independence. The purpose of this study is to provide empirical evidence for the
existence of a significant influence of the ISA points and the identity of the public accountant on the audit
quality generated by the auditor. This study was conducted by distributing questionnaires to all public
accounting firms in Surabaya and Sidoarjo, which consisted of 46 firms. The population for this study was
all the auditors working in public accounting firms in Surabaya and Sidoarjo, and the sample used was 158
auditors from 19 public accounting firms. Hypothesis testing was carried out by means of the Partial Least
Square method with Warp PLS version 5.0. The results show that auditor professional skepticism and
auditor professional judgement, as two important points of ISA, have a positive and significant effect on
audit quality. Further, independence, as the identity of an auditor, has a positive and significant effect on
audit quality, while audit risk, as another ISA point in terms of public management accounting, has a
negative and insignificant effect on audit quality.
1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of financial reporting is to provide
relevant and reliable information relating to a
company’s quantitative and qualitative financial
performance for all stakeholders (Kabalski, 2009;
Kamsir, 2013; Listiana & Susilo, 2012; Yurisandi &
Puspitasari, 2015). Measuring these two
characteristics of financial statements, which are
prepared by a company’s internal accountants, is so
difficult that further examination by an independent
accountant is needed. In this regard, financial
statements that have been examined by public
accountants will be more relevant and reliable
(Boynton & Johnson, 2006; Iguna & Herawati,
2010).
At times, there may still be elements of error that
affect the quality of financial statements, some of
which may be caused by the auditor’s own behavior.
One example of this was the case of PT. Kimia
Farma in 2001. The company’s financial statements
had been audited by Hans Tuanakotta, but, at the
time of re-examination by the Capital Market
Supervisory Agency (BAPEPAM) and the Ministry
of SOE, there was an understated net profit of
approximately IDR 32 billion. Hans Tuanakotta was
then declared unable to detect fraud or errors made
by PT. Kimia Farma (Koroy, 2008). A further
example was the case of PT. Great River
International, Tbk. in 2004, involving auditor
Justinus Aditya Sidharta. In this case, BAPEPAM
found an overstatement in the accounts receivable
and revenue (Hutabarat, 2012).
The same situation also happened to British
Telecom in Italy, involving the ‘big four’ public
accounting firm PwC. This case had an impact on
changing public perception of all aspects relating to
public accountants. The impact of this accounting
fraud, or profit bubble, caused British Telecom to
lower its stated profits by GBP 530 million and cut
its cash flow projections for the year by GBP 500
million in order to pay its hidden debts. It is rather
ironic that PwC, as one of the big four accounting
120
Subianto, C.
Determinants of Audit Quality: An Analysis of Three Points of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) and The Identity of The Auditor As An Independent Accountant.
In Proceedings of the Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics Symposium 2018 on Special Session for Indonesian Study (JCAE 2018) - Contemporary Accounting Studies in
Indonesia, pages 120-127
ISBN: 978-989-758-339-1
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

firms, could be dragged into such a financial
reporting scandal (Priantara, 2017).
Based on several cases of fraud and an increasing
number of cases of fraudulent financial statements,
auditors are required to emphasize their objectivity
when conducting an audit. Therefore, the role of
auditors as independent accountants is very
important in terms of detecting fraudulent financial
statements. Although regulations are often revised
and updated, most audited financial statements still
contain elements of misstatement, which reflect the
low quality of the audit. Therefore, the motivation of
this study is to determine the factors that influence
audit quality, which relate to the auditor’s ability to
detect auditee errors and fraud (DeAngelo, 1981).
In the International Standards on Auditing (ISA)
set by the IAASB in 1 January 2013, auditors are
required to have an attitude of professional
skepticism and professional judgement (Tuanakotta,
2013, 2015). In addition, public accountants cannot
separate themselves from their inherent identity of
auditor independence (Supriyono, 1988). Therefore,
this study has two main areas of focus. The first is
on auditor behavior with regard to the independent
variables professional skepticism, professional
judgement, and auditor independence. The second
focus is on the management of public accounting
firms related to audit risk, which also serves as an
independent variable. The dependent variable in this
research is audit quality. Auditors need to have
professional skepticism, professional judgement, and
independence because they have to be able to
produce quality audits (Agoes, 2012; Arens &
Loebbecke, 2011; Boynton & Johnson, 2006)
The skepticism of auditors has a significant
influence on audit quality (Anugerah & Harsono,
2014; Bowlin et al., 2015). Research conducted by
Kadous and Zou (2016) indicates that intrinsic
improvisation in audit assignments related to
skepticism can improve the quality of financial
statements. This means that skepticism is necessary
because it can improve the quality of financial
reporting, in addition to having a positive effect on
audit quality. However, an auditor’s skepticism in
the audit quality attribute may not satisfy the auditee
(Widagdo, 2002).
Previous studies have provided evidence that
auditor professional judgment can significantly
improve audit quality (Baldauf et al., 2015;
Bouhawia et al., 2015; Kulikova et al., 2014). The
results of the research conducted by Abbott et al.
(2015), Alim et al. (2007), and Dewi and Budhiarta
(2015) indicate that auditor independence has a
significant effect on improving audit quality,
whereas Futri and Juliarsa (2014) provide evidence
that independence has a non-significant effect on
audit quality.
The results of research carried out by Julianto et
al. (2016) and Suryo (2017) provide empirical
evidence that audit risk has a positive and significant
influence on audit quality, meaning that the auditor
experiences a certain level of uncertainty within a
certain range during audit assignment, and this
uncertainty has an impact on audit quality. In
contrast, research conducted by Suryani and
Helvinda (2014) provides evidence that audit risk
does not have an impact on audit quality.
Based on the above, the research questions can
be formulated as follows: 1) Does auditor
professional skepticism have a positive and
significant effect on audit quality? 2) Does auditor
professional judgement have a positive and
significant effect on audit quality? 3) Does auditor
independence have a positive and significant effect
on audit quality? 4) Does audit risk have a positive
and significant effect on audit quality?
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Theory of Planned Behavior
According to Jogiyanto the theory of planned
behavior (TPB) is a further development of the
theory of reasoned action, which was first put
forward by Ajzen in 1980, focusing on beliefs,
attitudes, intentions, and behavior. TPB arose from
the addition of a construct variable that had not
previously existed in the theory of reasonable
behavior: perceived behavioral control. This
construct variable was added with the aim of
harmonizing the condition for their intention
2.2 Behavioral Accounting
Behavioral accounting focuses on the relationship
between accounting and human behavior, and vice
versa (Siegel & Marconi, 1989). Behavioral
accounting is a focal point for accountants and non-
accountants who are influenced by the functions of
numbers in financial statements, one of which is
auditing function behavior, such as auditor’s
professional judgment and decisions during his/her
audit assignment (Suartana, 2010). Behavioral
accounting examines the conceptual aspects of
human behavior in the decision making process
(Lubis, 2010).
Determinants of Audit Quality: An Analysis of Three Points of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) and The Identity of The Auditor
As An Independent Accountant
121

2.3 Audit Concept
The audit concept relates to the systematic process
of collecting and evaluating evidence with the
objective of assessing the fairness of financial
statements (Arens & Loebbecke, 2011). An audit
assignment is carried out by an independent party
separate from the company, i.e. an independent
accountant. The general objective of the audit is to
assess the fairness of the financial statements
presented by the auditee and to ensure that the
financial statements presented are in accordance
with the applicable standards (Boynton & Johnson,
2006).
2.4 Audit Risk
Audit risk is the risk arising from the auditor not
modifying the published opinion, as should be done
on any information presented in the financial
statements, so as to indicate that the financial reports
contain material misstatements (Arens &
Loebbecke, 2011). Similarly, Tuanakotta (2013)
states that audit risk represents the risk of error in
issuing an audit opinion. According to Arens and
Loebbecke (2011), there are four components of
audit risk: 1) planned detection risk; 2) inherent risk;
3) control risk; and 4) acceptable risk. However,
according to Tuanakotta (2013), there are only three
components: 1) inherent risk; 2) control risk; and 3)
detection risk.
2.5 Research Hypotheses Development
2.5.1 The Effect of Professional Skepticism
on Audit Quality
Skepticism is a form of critical thinking where one
does not easily believe the auditee in the case of
obtaining sufficient and relevant evidence during the
examination of financial statements (Tuanakotta,
2015). Studies conducted by Afriyani et al. (2014),
Andreas et al. (2016), Bowlin et al. (2015),
Dimitrova and Sorova (2016), and Jaya et al. (2016)
provide empirical evidence that the attitude of
professional skepticism has a positive and
significant impact on audit quality. Given this idea
of critical thinking in regard to collecting and
evaluating evidence to improve the quality of the
audit produced, the first hypothesis is formulated as
follows:
H1: Auditor professional skepticism has a
positive and significant effect on audit quality.
2.5.2 The Effect of Professional Skepticism
on Audit Quality
As discussed earlier, professional judgement
emphasizes the competence, knowledge, and
experience of the auditor during the audit
assignment (Tuanakotta, 2013, 2015). The results of
previous studies regarding auditor professional
judgement show that, by applying professional
judgment, the auditor is able to improve the quality
of financial reporting (Chis & Achim, 2014). The
results of the research conducted by Baldauf et al.
(2015), Bouhawia et al. (2015), and Kulikova et al.
(2014) provide empirical evidence that professional
judgment has a significant influence and is able to
assist the auditor in his assignment to improve audit
quality. Based on the relevant theories and the
results of previous research, the auditors, through
professional judgement, are able to improve the
quality of the audit. Therefore, the second
hypothesis is as follows:
H2: Auditor professional judgement has a
positive and significant effect on audit quality.
2.5.3 The Effect of Auditor Independence on
Audit Quality
Conceptually, independence relates to an impartial
attitude to anyone in the audit assignment. In
addition to being the identity of public accountants,
independence must be possessed by auditors
otherwise the report presented may not be fit for
purpose (Mautz & Sharaf, 1961). In addition,
independence is a cornerstone of auditing
(Clikeman, 1998). Previous studies have provided
empirical evidence that auditor independence, as
stipulated in the Code of Ethics of Certified Public
Accountants (2008), has a positive and significant
influence on audit quality. In accordance with the
studies of Abbott et al. (2015), Dewi and Budhiarta
(2015), Rahmina (2014), and Sarwoko and Agoes
(2014), the more the auditor upholds independence,
the more he/she improves audit quality. Thus,
hypothesis three can be formulated as follows:
H3: Auditor independence has a positive and
significant effect on audit quality.
JCAE Symposium 2018 – Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics Symposium 2018 on Special Session for Indonesian Study
122

2.5.4 The Effect of Audit Risk on Audit
Quality
Audit risk relates to an auditor’s error in submitting
an opinion (Tuanakotta, 2013). In addition, Arens
and Loebbecke (2011) state that the more
appropriate the opinion submitted or published by
the auditors to the real conditions, the lower the
audit risk. The research results of Julianto et al.
(2016) and Suryo (2017) provide similar evidence
that audit risk has a significant effect on audit
quality. However, a study by Suryani and Helvinda
(2014) provides opposing results, i.e. audit risk has
an insignificant effect on the detection of fraudulent
financial statements, as one indicator of audit
quality. With regard to previous research and related
theories, the fourth hypothesis can be formulated as
follows:
H4: Audit risk has a significant effect on audit
quality.
2.6 Conceptual Framework
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework.
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study used a quantitative explanatory approach
to test the formulated hypotheses and search for a
causal relationship between the independent
variables and dependent variable proposed in the
research (Anshori & Iswati, 2009).
3.1 Population and Sample
The population for this study was the auditors
working in 46 public accounting firms in Surabaya
and Sidoarjo. In utilizing a purposive sampling
method, the sample for this study consisted of 158
auditors.
3.2. Operational Definition
Table 1: Operational Definition.
Variable Indicators
Audit Quality Compliance with audit standards
Quality of audit report
Professional
Skepticism
Auditor’s experience
Curiosity on audit evidence tracking
Critical thinking
Professional
Judgement
Auditor’s special expertise
Length of work
Auditor’s knowledge
Auditor
Independence
Independence in setting work
programs
Independence in carrying out the
work
Independence in reporting
Independence in appearance
Independence in mind
Audit Risk Inherent Risk
The nature of the client’s business
Previous audit findings
Related parties
Control Risk
Knowledge and understanding of
internal control
Detection Risk
Auditor competence
3.2.1 Audit Quality
Audit quality relates to the auditor’s ability to detect
auditee fraud relating to the accounting system being
run (DeAngelo, 1981). Audit quality indicates how
appropriate the audit results are to the established
standards (Watkins et al., 2004).
3.2.2 Auditor Professional Skepticism
Professional skepticism is a critical attitude in
relation to continually seeking sufficient and
relevant evidence and then evaluating the evidence
deeply (Tuanakotta, 2013). Auditor skepticism
relates to critical thinking, curiosity, continuing to
ask the authorities whether the audit evidence is
Determinants of Audit Quality: An Analysis of Three Points of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) and The Identity of The Auditor
As An Independent Accountant
123

valid or not, and then assessing the financial
statements fairly.
3.2.3 Auditor Professional Judgement
Professional judgement emphasizes the expertise,
competence, knowledge, and experience of the
auditors during audit work in the field (Tuanakotta,
2013).
3.2.4 Auditor Independence
Independence relates to a free and impartial attitude
during any assignment. Independence is associated
with upholding objectivity during fieldwork (Mautz
& Sharaf, 1961; Mulyadi, 2006).
3.2.5 Audit Risk
Audit risk relates the auditor’s error in publishing an
opinion (Tuanakotta, 2015). There are three
components of audit risk used in the measuring
instrument: 1) inherent risk; 2) control risk; and 3)
detection risk.
3.3 Data Analysis Model
Testing in this research was conducted to examine
the causal relationships between variables. The
model used was the Structural Equation Model
(SEM), which is based on components or variances,
better known as the Partial Least Square (PLS)
method. This model was used so as to examine the
relationship between the independent variables and
the dependent variable.
3.4 Outer Model Measurement
PLS analysis was conducted using the measurement
of outer and inner models. The outer model
examines the loading factor values for each variable
indicator. The reflective size correlates to > 0.7 with
the constructs to be measured. A scale of 0.5 to 0.6
is considered sufficient (Chin, 1995). This study
used an outer loading value of 0.50.
3.4.1 Validity Test
A measurement scale is considered valid if it is able
to measure what should be measured (Kuncoro,
2001). The method for assessing validity is to
compare the square root of the Average Variance
Extracted (AVE) value of one construct with
another; after this, the AVE value must be greater
than 0.30 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
3.4.2 Reliability Test
The testing technique used in this study was
composite reliability, which can be measured in two
different ways: 1) internal consistency and 2)
Cronbach’s alpha (Ghozali, 2006). A reliability
value above 0.70 indicates that the statement or
indicator is reliable.
3.5 Inner Model Measurement
The purpose of inner model measurement is to
determine, using the R-square (R
2
) value, the level
of influence between the independent and dependent
variables.
3.6 Hypothesis Test
Hypothesis testing was carried out by the use of a
partial t-test to assess the influence of the
independent variables. The levels of confidence used
are 90%, 95%, and 99%, so the levels of precision or
tolerance limits of inaccuracy are 1%, 5%, and 10%:
1) If t-statistic < t-table or probability < α, H0 is
accepted and H1 is rejected; 2) If t-statistic ≥ t-table
or probability ≥ α, H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted.
4 DATA ANALYSIS AND
DISCUSSION
4.1 Results of the Outer Model
Measurement
4.1.1 Results of the Validity Test
Table 2: Results of the Discriminant Validity
Measurement
Variables Original
Sampling (O)
P-values
Skepticism 0.514 0.000
Professional Judgement 0.514 0.000
Independence 0.528 0.000
Audit Risk 0.809 0.000
Audit Quality 0.512 0.000
JCAE Symposium 2018 – Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics Symposium 2018 on Special Session for Indonesian Study
124

All variables have discriminant validity values in
the column of original sampling (o) > 0.30 and a p-
value < significance level. It can therefore be
concluded that all the variables are valid.
4.1.2 Results of the Reliability Test
Table 3: Results of the Composite Reliability
Measurement.
Variables Original
Sampling
(O)
P-
values
Skepticis
m
0.894 0.000
Professional Jud
g
ement 0.865 0.000
Inde
p
endence 0.820 0.000
Audit Ris
k
0.976 0.000
Audit Quality 0.809 0.000
All variables have composite values > 0.70. It
can be concluded that all variables are reliable and
can be used for further analysis
4.2 Results of the Inner Model
Measurement
Table 4: Value of the Adjusted R-square (Adjusted R
2
).
Dependent Variable Value of Adjusted R-square
(R
2
)
Audit Quality 37.30%
The dependent variable of audit quality has an R-
square value of 37.30%. This means that 37.30% of
audit quality can be explained by the independent
variables in this research.
4.3 Results of the Hypothesis Test and
Discussion
Table 5: Relationship between the Variables.
Relationship between the
Variables
Original
Sample
(O)
p-
values
Skepticism Æ Audit Quality 0.420 0.000
Professional Judgement Æ
Audit Quality
0.170 0.010
Inde
p
endence Æ Audit Qualit
y
0.160 0.020
Audit Risk Æ Audit Qualit
y
-0.100 0.110
Based on the t-statistic tests, it can be concluded
that auditor professional skepticism and auditor
professional judgement have a positive and
significant effect on audit quality. This is in line
with the studies conducted by Afriyani et al. (2014),
Andreas et al. (2016), Baldauf et al. (2015), Bowlin
et al. (2015), Bouhawia et al. (2015), Dimitrova and
Sorova (2016), and Kulikova et al. (2014). Further,
auditor independence has a positive and significant
effect on audit quality, which is in line with the
studies conducted by Abbott et al. (2015), Dewi and
Budhiarta (2015), Rahmina (2014), and Sarwoko
and Agoes (2014). Finally, audit risk has a negative
and insignificant effect on audit quality, which is in
line with the research conducted by Suryani and
Helvinda (2014).
5 CONCLUSIONS AND
SUGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
1. Auditor professional skepticism has a positive
effect on audit quality, which is statistically
significant at the 1% level. This means that
being critical of the client followed by
collecting evidence objectively is able to
improve audit quality.
2. Auditor professional judgement has a positive
effect on audit quality, which is statistically
significant at the 1% level. This means that
learning from knowledge and experience and
prioritizing competence during the audit
assignment can improve audit quality.
3. Auditor independence has a positive effect on
audit quality, which is statistically significant at
the 5% level. Auditors formulate two-way
communication channels with the team leader,
audit manager, or partners so as to be able to
generate the appropriate audit program during
audit work and produce audit quality.
4. Audit risk has a negative effect on audit quality,
which is statistically insignificant at the 10%
level. High or low inherent risk or business
complexity do not affect the quality of a client’s
financial reporting. High or low risk control
does not affect audit quality.
5.2 Suggestions
To enable future research, it is expected that public
accounting firms will always be willing to complete
questionnaires for the processing of research data.
Determinants of Audit Quality: An Analysis of Three Points of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) and The Identity of The Auditor
As An Independent Accountant
125

REFERENCES
Abbott et al. (2015). Internal Audit Quality and Financial
Reporting Quality: The Joint Importance of
Independence and Competence. Journal Of
Accounting Research, 54(1), 3-40. doi: 10.1111/1475-
679X.12099
Afriyani et al. (2014). Pengaruh Kompetensi, Motivasi,
dan Skeptisisme Profesional terhadap Kualitas Audit
Auditor Inspektorat Se-Provinsi Riau. Jurnal JOM
FEKON, 1(2).
Agoes, S. (2012). Auditing Petunjuk Praktis Pemeriksaan
Akuntan Oleh Akuntan Publik Jilid 1. Jakarta:
Salemba Empat.
Alim et al. (2007). Pengaruh Kompetensi dan
Independensi terhadap Kualitas Audit dengan Etika
Auditor Sebagai Variabel Moderasi. Simposium
Nasional Akuntansi X
Andreas et al. (2016). Analysis Of Factors Affecting The
Auditors' Professional Skepticism and Audit Result
Quality: The Case Of Indonesian Government
Auditors. I J A B E R, 14(6), 3807-3818.
Anugerah, R. and Harsono, S. (2014). Pengaruh
Kompetensi, Kompleksitas Tugas, dan Skeptisisme
Profesional Terhadap Kualitas Audit. Jurnal
Akuntansi, 2(2).
Arens, A. and Loebbecke, K. (2011). Auditing, An
Integrated Approach. New Jersey: Prentince-Hall Inc.
Baldauf et al. (2015). The Influence of Audit Risk and
Materiality Guidelines on Auditor's Planning
Materiality Assessment. Accounting and Finance
Research, 4(4).
Bouhawia et al. (2015). The Effect of Working
Experience, Integrity, Competence, and
Organizational Commitment on Audit Quality (Survey
State Owned Companies In Libya). IOSR Journal of
Economics and Finance (IOSR-JEF) 6(4), 60-69.
Bowlin et al. (2015). The Effects of Auditor Rotation,
Professional Skepticism, and Interactions with
Managers on Audit Quality. The Accounting Review,
90(4), 1363-1393.
Boynton, C. and Johnson. (2006). Modern Auditing:
Assurance Services and The Integrity of Financial
Reporting. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
DeAngelo, E. (1981). Auditor Size and Auditor Quality.
Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183-199.
Dewi, C. and Budhiarta, K. (2015). Pengaruh Kompetensi
dan Independensi Auditor Pada Kualitas Audit
Dimoderasi Oleh Tekanan Klien. E-Jurnal Akuntansi
Universitas Udayana, 11(1), 197-210.
Dimitrova, J. and Sorova, A. (2016). The Role of
Professional Skepticism In Financial Statement Audit
and Its Appropriate Application. Journal of
Economics, 1(2).
Futri, S. and Juliarsa, G. (2014). Pengaruh Independensi,
Profesionalisme, Tingkat Pendidikan, Etika Profesi,
Pengalaman dan Kepuasan Kerja Auditor pada
Kualitas Audit KAP di Bali. E-Jurnal Akuntansi
Universitas Udayana, 7(2), 444-461.
Ghozali, I. (2006). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan
Program SPSS. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas
Diponegoro.
Hutabarat, G. (2012). Pengaruh Pengalaman Time Budget
Pressure dan Etika Auditor Terhadap Kualitas Audit.
Jurnal Ilmiah 6(1).
Iguna, W. & Herawati, A. (2010). Pengaruh Mekanisme
Good Corporate Governance, Independensi Auditor,
Kualitas Audit dan Faktor Lainnya Terhadap
Manajemen Laba. Jurnal Bisnis dan Akuntansi, 12(1),
53-68.
Jogiyanto. (2007). Sistem Informasi Keperilakuan.
Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.
Julianto et al. (2016). Pengaruh Audit Fee, Perencanaan
Audit, dan Risiko Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit Pada
Kantor Akuntan Publik di Bali. E-Journal Ekonomi
dan Bisnis Universitas Udayana, 5(12), 4029-4056.
Kabalski, P. (2009). Comments on the Objective of
Financial Reporting in the Proposed New Conceptual
Framework Eurasian Journal of Business and
Economics 2009, 2(4), 95-111.
Kadous, K. and Zou, D. (2016). How Does Intrinsic
Motivation Improve Auditor Skepticism in Complex
Audit Tasks? Emory University.
Kamsir. (2013). Analisis Laporan Keuangan Edisi 1.
Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Koroy, R. (2008). Pendeteksian Kecurangan (Fraud)
Laporan Keuangan oleh Auditor Eksternal. Jurnal
Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 10(1).
Kulikova et al. (2014). The Interrelation between the
Professional Judgment of the Accountant and the
Quality of Financial Reporting. Mediterranean
Jo5urnal of Social Science, 5(24).
Listiana, L. and Susilo, P. (2012). Faktor-Faktor
Memengaruhi Reporting Lag Perusahaan. Media Riset
Akuntansi, 2(1).
Priantara, D. (2017). Ketika Skandal Fraud Akuntansi
Menerpa British Telecom dan PwC Retrieved
November 19, 2017, 2017, from
https://www.wartaekonomi.co.id/read145257/ketika-
skandal-fraud-akuntansi-menerpa-british-telecom-dan-
pwc.html
Rahmina, Y. (2014). Influence Of Auditor Independence,
Audit Tenure, And Audit Fee On Audit Quality Of
Members Of Capital Market Accountant Forum In
Indonesia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
164, 324-331.
Sarwoko, I. and Agoes, S. (2014). An Empirical Analysis
Of Auditor’s Industry Specialization, Auditor’s
Independence And Audit Procedures On Audit
Quality: Evidence from Indonesia Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences 164, 271-281.
Supriyono. (1988). Pemriksaan Akuntan (Auditing).
Yogyakarta: BPFE Yogyakarta.
Suryani, E. and Helvinda, V. A. (2014). Pengaruh
Pengalaman, Risiko Audit, dan Keahlian Audit
Terhadap Pendeteksian Kecurangan (Fraud) Oleh
Auditor (Survey Pada KAP di Bandung). Seminar
Nasional Ekonomi dan Bisnis (SNEB) 2014.
JCAE Symposium 2018 – Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics Symposium 2018 on Special Session for Indonesian Study
126

Suryo, M. (2017). Pengaruh Time Budget Pressure dan
Risiko Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit (Survey Pada
Auditor Di Kantor Akuntan Publik Di Bandung).
Jurnal Riset Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 5(1), 148-160.
Tuanakotta, M. (2013). Audit Berbasis ISA. Jakarta:
Salemba Empat.
Tuanakotta, M. (2015). Audit Kontemporer. Jakarta:
Salemba Empat.
Widagdo, R. (2002). Analisis Pengaruh Atribut-Atribut
Kualitas Audit Terhadap Kepuasan Klien. Jurnal
Simposium Nasional Akuntansi, 5.
Yurisandi, T. and Puspitasari, E. (2015). Financial
Reporting Quality - Before and After IFRS Adoption
Using NiCE Qualitative Characteristics Measurement.
2nd Global Conference on Business and Social
Science-2015(September 17-18, 2015).
Determinants of Audit Quality: An Analysis of Three Points of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) and The Identity of The Auditor
As An Independent Accountant
127