Table 6.

Mediated-moderation analysis (Hayes (2018) approach, model 8)

VariableParameter estimateStandard errorZ-statp-valueb
Panel A. Negligent verdicta
Intercept−3.581.01−3.550.004
Inventory observation methodc0.260.660.390.695
Consistency with audit industry normsd0.510.770.670.504
Foreseeabilitye0.780.164.78< 0.001
Method × consistency−1.081.01−1.060.144
Panel B. Negligence likelihoodf
Intercept1.070.492.170.032
Inventory observation methodc0.240.340.710.477
Consistency with audit industry normsd0.420.341.250.215
Foreseeabilitye0.800.0711.52< 0.001
Method × consistency−0.610.48−1.250.106
Note(s):

aNegligent verdict is coded as 0 for not negligent and 1 for negligent, and then reported as a percentage.

bReported p-values are based on one-tailed tests where directional effects are predicted and two-tailed tests otherwise.

cInventory observation method, as randomly assigned, is coded as 0 for the drones condition and 1 for the human staff condition.

dConsistency with audit industry norms, as randomly assigned, is coded as 0 for the consistent condition and 1 for the inconsistent condition.

eForeseeability (by the auditor), as reported here, is the average of the assessment of predictability, which can vary between 0 (very little extent predictable) and 10 (very high extent predictable), and the assessment of controllability, which can vary between 0 (very little extent controllable) and 10 (very high extent controllable).

fNegligence likelihood can vary between 0 (not at all likely) and 10 (extremely likely)

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal