Empirical study examines CAATs' influence on audit effectiveness in Indonesian auditors, suggesting usability improvements.
Under increasing pressures to improve audit efficiency and effectiveness in today's dynamic business environment, auditors are increasingly relying on the adoption of Computer-Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATs) to enhance financial audit task effectiveness (FATE). This empirical study examines the key factors influencing CAATs usage among Indonesian external auditors using the well-established Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) framework and further explores the potential moderating role of Computer Literacy (CL) in this area. Participants were selected using a combination of snowball and convenience sampling methods to ensure broader reach. A quantitative research approach was employed, with primary data collected through structured questionnaires distributed to 110 external auditors from various public accounting firms in Indonesia. The data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling–Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS) with the assistance of SmartPLS 4.0. The findings reveal that Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) significantly influences both CAATs usage and Perceived Usefulness (PU), while Perceived Usefulness (PU) does not significantly influence CAATs usage. Computer Literacy (CL) also does not moderate the relationship tested between TAM variables and CAATs usage. Furthermore, the analysis confirms that CAATs usage positively impacts financial audit task effectiveness (FATE), highlighting its practical value in enhancing audit performance and supporting the auditor's ability to carry out audit tasks more accurately. These results suggest that public accounting firms should focus on improving and enhancing system usability, developing user-friendly and accessible audit technologies with simple interfaces, and providing comprehensive auditor training to encourage greater adoption of CAATs usage. Auditors may then be more inclined to integrate technology into their workflows, ultimately improving audit quality and efficiency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jayanti et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: