PERAN MODERASI FRAMING DAN GAYA KOGNITIF TERHADAP BIAS EFEK URUTAN BUKTI DALAM KEPUTUSAN PENGANGGARAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2016.v20.i4.63Keywords:
order effects, belief-adjustment model, framing, cognitive styleAbstract
This study is aimed to empirically test the moderating roles of information framing and cognitive style on recency effect in budgeting decision, as a part of management accounting decisions. Laboratory experimental method used in this study with a 2x2x2 between-subjects design involving participants of 100 undergraduate accounting students at two universities in Central of Java and Yogyakarta provinces. The results of this study indicate that in the Step-by-Step (sequentially) response mode, the occurence of recency effects can be mitigated by information framing. In contrast, participants in the End-of-Sequence (simultaneously) response mode did not experience any order effects. Moreover, the interesting finding is that the interaction effect between information order and response modes indicating that the End-of-Sequence response mode alone can reduce the recency effects. However, the prediction of interaction effect between information order, information framing, and cognitive styles in both Step-by-Step and End-of-Sequence was not supported.
References
Allinson, C. dan J. Hayes. 1996. The Cognitive Style Index: A Measure of Intuition-Analysis For Organizational Research. Journal of Management Studies 33(1): 119-135.
Allinson, C. dan J. Hayes. 2012. The Cognitive Style Index: Technical Manual and User Guide. Pearson Education. United Kingdom.
Almilia, L. S. 2012. Model Belief Adjustment dalam Pengambilan Keputusan Investasi. Doctoral Colloqium & Conference FEB UGM, Yogyakarta, 28-29 November 2012.
Alvia, L. dan D. Sulistiawan. 2010. The Impact of Cognitive Style to Recency Effect in Stock Investment: An Experimental Study. SSRN Working Paper.
Armet, N. 2013. How Investors Can Avoid Dangers of Recency Bias. http:/www. moneymanagement.com.au/features/editorial/how-investors-can-avoid-dangers-recency-bias. Diakses tanggal 7 Mei 2014.
Asare, S. K. dan W. F. Messier, Jr. 1991. A Review of Audit Research Using the Belief-Adjustment Model. In: L. Ponemon & C.R. Gebhart, Auditing: Advances in Behavioral Research. Springer-Verlag. New York.
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.
Ashton, A. H. dan R. H. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review 63: 623-641.
Ashton, R. H. dan J. Kennedy. 2002. Eliminating Recency with Self-Review: The Case of Auditors’ ‘Going Concern’ Judgments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 3: 221-231.
Bamber, E. M., R. J. Ramsay, dan R. M. Tubbs. 1997. An Examination of the Descriptive Validity of the Belief-Adjustment Model and Alternative Attitudes to Evidence in Auditing. Accounting, Organizations and Society 22(3/4): 249-268.
Brewer, P. C. 2008. Redefining Management Accounting: Promoting the Four Pillars of Our Profession. Strategic Finance.
Brown, C. 1985. Causal Reasoning in Performance Assessment: Effects of Cause and Effect Temporal Order and Covaria- tion. Accounting Organizations and Society 10(3): 255-266.
Chan, M. K. Mike. 1995. The Moderating Effectc of Cognitive Style and Recency Effect on the Auditor Belief Revision Process. Managerial Auditing Journal 10(9): 22-28.
Chenhall, R. dan D. Morris. 1991. The Effect of Cognitive Style and Sponsorship Bias on the Treatment of Opportunity Costs in Resource Allocation Decisions. Accounting, Organizations and Society 16(1): 27-46.
Dillard, J. F., N. L. Kauffman, dan E. E. Spires. 1991. Evidence Order and Belief Revision in Management Accounting Decisions. Accounting, Organizations and Society 16(7): 619-633.
Fischhoff, B. 1983. Predicting Frames. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 9: 103-116.
Guiral, A. dan F. Esteo. 2006. Are Spanish auditors skeptical in going concern evaluations?. Managerial Auditing Journal 21(6): 598-620.
Gunawan, B. dan M. H. Yusuf. 2012. Pengaruh Order Effect dan Pola Pengungkapan dalam Pengambilan Keputusan Investasi. Jurnal InFestasi 8(2): 123-136.
Hogarth, M. R. dan H. Einhorn. 1992. Order Effects in Belief Updating: The Belief-Adjustment Model. Cognitive Psychology 24: 1-55.
Kahneman, D. dan A. Tversky. 1981. The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science 211(4481): 453-458.
Krishnamoorthy, G., T. J. Mock dan M. T. Washington. 1999. A Comparative Evaluation of Belief Revision Models in Auditing. Auditing 18(2): 105.
Lewis, B., M. Shields, dan S. M. Young. 1983. Evaluating Human Judgments and Decision Aids. Journal of Accounting Research 21(1): 271-285.
Ma, Y. dan M. Tayles. 2009. On The Emergence of Strategic Management Accounting: an Institutional Perspective. Accounting and Business Research 39(5): 473-495.
Nahartyo, E. 2012. Desain dan Implementasi Riset Eksperimen. UPP STIM YKPN. Yogyakarta.
Nasution, D. dan Supriyadi. 2007. Pengaruh Urutan Bukti, Gaya Kognitif, dan Personalitas terhadap Proses Revisi Keyakinan. Prosiding Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X Unhas Makassar, 26-28 Juli 2007.
Pei, B. K. W., S. A. Reed, dan B. S . Koch. 1992. Auditor Belief Revisions in A Performance Auditing Setting: An Appli- cation of the Belief-Adjustment Model. Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(2): 169-183.
Pinsker, R. 2011. Primacy or Recency? A Study of Order Effects When Non-professional Investors are Provided a Long Series of Disclosures. Behavioral Research in Accounting 23(1): 161-183.
Rutledge, R. W. 1995. The Ability To Moderate Recency Effects Through Framing Of Management Accounting Information. Journal of Managerial Issues 7(1): 27-40.
Theis, J. C., K. Yankova, dan M. Eulerich. 2012. Information order effects in the context of management commentary: initial experiment evidence. Journal Management Control 23: 133-150.
Tubbs, R. M., W. F. Messier, Jr., dan W. R. Knechel. 1990. Recency Effects in the Auditor's Belief-Revision Process. The Accounting Review 65(2): 452-460.
