Factors Affecting Auditors' Intention To Use Artificial Intelligence In Financial Statement Audits: Empirical Evidence From Vietnam
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20252364Keywords:
Artificial intelligence (AI), intention to use, auditingAbstract
Introduction: artificial intelligence (AI) is a fundamental technology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, influencing various facets of social life across numerous nations, including Vietnam. The Prime Minister's Accounting and Auditing Strategy for 2030 in Vietnam(1) underscores the objective of executing digital transformation in accounting and auditing, accentuating the significance of AI applications in this initiative. Consequently, it is imperative to comprehend the determinants that affect the implementation of AI in auditing. This study seeks to analyze the determinants influencing auditors' intention to employ AI in financial statement audits by synthesizing the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB).
Method: a quantitative analysis was conducted using SPSS 22, based on data collected from 139 independent auditors currently working at audit firms in Vietnam.
Results: the results indicate that perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control all have a positive impact on auditors’ intention to adopt AI in financial statement audits. Among these, attitude is the most influential positive factor, and perceived behavioral control has the lowest influence on auditors' intention to use AI.
Conclusions: these findings provide a basis for proposing recommendations to technology service providers in the audit sector and organizational management to enhance both the extent and effectiveness of AI adoption by auditors in financial statement audits.
References
1. Prime Minister. Decision No. 633/QD-TTg dated May 23, 2022 on approving the Accounting-Auditing Strategy to 2030. 2022. https://vanban.chinhphu.vn/?pageid=27160&docid=205809
2. AlSheibani S, Cheung Y & Messom C. Artificial Intelligence Adoption: AI-readiness at Firm-Level. 2018; 37. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2018/37
3. World Economic Forum. Deep Shift Technology Tipping Points and Societal Impact. 2015. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC15_Technological_Tipping_Points_report_2015.pdf
4. Davenport T H. The power of advanced audit analytics Everywhere Analytics. Deloitte Development LLC. 2016.
5. Faggella D. AI in the accounting Big four – Comparing Deloitte, PwC, KPMG, and EY. 2018. https://emerj.com/ai-in-the-accounting-big-four-comparing-deloitte-pwc-kpmg-and-ey/
6. KPMG. KPMG Ignite: Accelerating, automating, and augmenting decisions through Artificial Intelligence. 2018. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmgsites/uk/pdf/2018/09/kpmg-ignite.pdf
7. OECD. Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Big Data in Finance: Opportunities, Challenges and Implications for Policy Makers. OECD Publishing. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1787/98e761e7-en
8. Rahmani A, Azhir E, Ali S, Mohammadi M, Ahmed O, Ghafour M, Ahmed S, & Hosseinzadeh M. Artificial intelligence approaches and mechanisms for big data analytics: A systematic study. PeerJ Computer Science. 2021; 7: e488. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.488
9. Lin P & Hazelbaker T. Meeting the Challenge of Artificial Intelligence What CPAs Need to Know. The CPA Journal. 2019; 89: 48–52. https://www.cpajournal.com/2019/07/03/meeting-the-challenge-of-artificial-intelligence/
10. Nickerson M A. AI: New Risks and Rewards. Institute of Management Accountants. 2019. https://www.sfmagazine.com/articles/2019/april/ai-new-risks-and-rewards/
11. Mirestean A, Farias A, Deodoro J, Boukherouaa E B, AlAjmi K, Iskender E, Ravikumar R, & Shabsigh G. Powering the Digital Economy: Opportunities and Risks of Artificial In telligence in Finance. Departmental Papers. 2021(024); 1. Crossref.
https://doi.org/10.5089/9781589063952.087
12. Siau K & Wang W. Building trust in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and robotics. Cutter Business Technology Journal. 2018; 31(2): 47–53.
https://www.cutter.com/sites/default/files/itjournal/2018/cbtj1802.pdf
13. OECD. Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Big Data in Finance: Opportunities, Challenges and Implications for Policy Makers. OECD Publishing. 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1787/98e761e7-en
14. Nguyen Vinh K, Anh O L H, Ha L, Cuong L, Ngan N, Thu H & Minh L. Factors Affecting Decision to Adopt Artificial Intelligence During COVID-19 Pandemic Period: Evidence from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective. 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1177/09722629221149847
15. Can Quoc H. Accounting and auditing in the context of new technology application and international integration: Opportunities, challenges and issues. The Scientific Journal of Trung Vuong University. 2025; Vol. 1(No. 2): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.64223/tvj.p2025.v1.i2.a30
16. Widya K A, Zaki B & Bambang H. Study on auditor’s attitude in using information technology for auditing: Theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory modification. Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences. 2017; 6(66): 602–617.
https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2017-06.29
17. Ajzen I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991; 50: 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
18. Kim E, Lee J A, Sung Y & Choi S. Predicting selfie-posting behavior on social networking sites: An extension of theory of planned behavior. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 62: 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.078
19. Davis F & Davis F. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989; 13: 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
20. Venkatesh V & Davis F. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science. 2000; 46: 186–204.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
21. Beck L & Ajzen I. Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Personality. 1991; 25(3): 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(91)90021-H
22. Venkatesh V, Morris M, Davis G, & Davis F. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly. 2003; 27: 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
23. Banker R, Chang H & Kao Y C. Impact of Information Technology on Public Accounting Firm Productivity. Journal of Information Systems. 2002; 16: 209–222.
https://doi.org/10.2308/jis.2002.16.2.209
24. Pedrosa I & Costa C. Statutory auditor’s profile and computer assisted audit tools and techniques’ acceptance: Indicators on firms and peers’ influence. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1145/2618168.2618172
25. Curtis M & Payne E. An Examination of Contextual Factors and Individual Characteristics Affecting Technology Implementation Decisions in Auditing. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems. 2008; 9: 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2007.10.002
26. Rosli K, Yeow P, & Eu-Gene S. Adoption of Audit Technology in Audit Firms. In Proceedings of the 24th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. 2013.
https://research.monash.edu/en/publications/adoption-of-audit-technology-in-audit-firms
27. Martens D, Bruynseels L, Baesens B, Willekens M & Vanthienen J. Predicting going concern opinion with data mining. Decision Support Systems. 2008; 45: 765–777.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2008.01.003
28. Bambang H & Widya K A. Determinants of behavioral intentions towards auditor behaviors in using audit information technology: Modified technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior. Eurasia: Economics & Business. 2019; 5(23): 95–102.
https://doi.org/10.18551/econeurasia.2019-05
29. Lam T, Cho V, & Qu H. A study of hotel employee behavior intentions towards adoption of information technology. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 2007; 26: 49–65.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2005.09.002
30. Handoko B & Suryadharma W. Planned Behavior and Social Cognitive Model on Auditor’s Attitude in Adopting Information Technology. 2020: 43.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3446922.3446929
31. Lin H F. Understanding Behavioral Intention to Participate in Virtual Communities. Cyberpsychology & Behavior : The Impact of the Internet, Multimedia and Virtual Reality on Behavior and Society. 2006; 9: 540–547. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.540
32. Jafarkarimi H, Saadatdoost R, Sim A T H & Hee J M. Behavioral intention in social networking sites ethical dilemmas: An extended model based on Theory of Planned Behavior. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 62: 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.024
33. Cheung M & To W M. Service co-creation in social media: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 65: 260–266.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.031
34. Baker R & White K. Predicting adolescents’ use of social networking sites form an extended theory of planned behavior perspective. Computers in Human Behavior. 2010; 26: 1591–1597.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.006
35. Lynne G D, Franklin Casey C, Hodges A & Rahmani M. Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology. 1995; 16(4): 581–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(95)00031-6
36. Hair J, Black W, Babin B & Anderson R. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. 2010
37. Afsay A, Tahriri A & Rezaee Z. A Meta-Analysis of Factors Affecting Acceptance of Information Technology in Auditing. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems. 2023; 49.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2022.100608
38. Ardelia A U, Fangasadha C F & Widuri R. Integrating TAM, TPB, and SCT in predicting CAATs adoption: A triple lens approach. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology. 2025; 103(5). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16959511
39. Tabachnick B & Fidell Linda S. Using Multivarite Statistics. In Boston: Allyn & Bacon. 2007 (Vol. 3).
40. Velicer W F & Fava J L. Effects of Variable and Subject Sampling on Factor Pattern Recovery. Psychological Methods. 1998; Vol.3 (No.2): 231-251. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.2.231.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Thi Hong Lam Nguyen, Thi Thu Thuy Pham (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
