Identifying the Components of Interactional Justice and Investigating Their Effect on Auditors' Willingness to Whistleblowing
نویسندگان
1 Associate Professor, Department of Financial Management, Islamshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 PhD student in accounting - Islamic Azad University, United Arab Emirates branch
3 University Professor - Director of Finance and Accounting Department, Islamic Azad University - United Arab Emirates Branch.
4 Assistant Professor of Islamic Azad University - Quds Branch - Tehran – Iran
doi
10.30495/ijfma.2024.75517.2067چکیده
Abstract: Historically, the conceptual and research position of social justice has been focused on the field of distributive justice and procedural justice; While the review of studies shows that these dimensions and components have evolved over time and it is necessary to know other effective factors in this field according to the field of auditing. n auditing and especially in the field of fraud reporting, it is not only the reward and encouragement of auditors that leads to motivating them, but also a set of other factors such as access to transparent and timely information are effective. In this research, by reviewing the theoretical literature by means of content analysis and interviewing audit experts, and then distributing questionnaires among the auditors who are members of the Certified Public Accountants Society of Iran, the components of interactive justice were identified and their impact on auditors' willingness to report fraud was investigated. The results of content analysis and then screening the indicators obtained by interviewing experts showed that interactive justice includes 2 dimensions, 8 components and 23 indicators. The dimension of interpersonal justice (including 4 components of respect, politeness and courtesy, support for disclosure and organizational relations) and informational justice (including 4 components of correctness and sufficiency of information, honesty and transparency, fair distribution of information and informational justification of decisions). The results also showed that the informational justification of decisions has the greatest impact on fraud reporting.