Audit inquiry can be a valuable source of information for auditors, particularly when the client provides useful information about important issues that could affect the audit. Recent studies indicate that the way an audit inquiry is conducted can affect the level of cooperation in the client's response. In this study, I investigate the use of social norms as an intervention auditors could include in their inquiries to increase the likelihood of client cooperation. To test my hypotheses, I conducted a 2x2 between-subjects experiment with 138 MBA and senior accounting students who proxied for non-accounting and accounting managers, respectively. I manipulated the auditor's use of a positive descriptive norm, which informed participants that the desired behavior is typical among similar others. I also manipulated the auditor's use of a negative injunctive norm, which informed participants of social disapproval for not engaging in the desired behavior. The dependent variable was a scaled measure of the likelihood the participant would disclose useful information in their response to the auditor. I find evidence of a main effect for both social norms I test. I do not find evidence of an interaction between the two social norms. My findings contribute to the audit literature as well as to audit practice. First, I contribute to the audit literature by identifying factors that improve client cooperation with an audit inquiry, including the communication of a positive descriptive norm and a negative injunctive norm. Second, my findings contribute to practice by providing evidence that social norms included in an audit inquiry can persuade clients to cooperate with an inquiry.

No description available.