| Summary: | Although auditors engage in considerable social interaction (Gibbins & Mason, 1988; Solomon, 1987), little is known about how social interaction influences an auditor's moral reasoning process. In order to address this gap, this study used an experiment to examine the effect of social influence on 288 auditors' moral reasoning on realistic moral dilemmas. The results of this study indicate that social interaction influences the moral reasoning of auditors. Auditors' level of prescriptive reasoning appears to increase after engaging in discussion of a realistic moral dilemma, particularly for those which discuss dilemmas with others at high levels of moral development, while auditors' level of deliberative reasoning appears to decrease after engaging in discussion of a realistic moral dilemma. At a practical level, these findings suggest that auditors should be encouraged to prescriptively discuss moral dilemmas with others of high levels of moral development as this tends to result in the use of more principled moral reasoning. In contrast, auditors should avoid deliberative discussion of moral dilemmas, as this tends to result in the use of less principled moral reasoning than would be used in the absence of discussion.
|
|---|
