Internal audit quality in the stress paradigm and social exchange relationships

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research model. Source: Figure by authors.

Table 1. Characteristics of respondents.

Item	Frequency	(%)
Sex
Male	57	45
Female	69	55
Age category (years)
20–29	16	12.7
30–39	62	49.2
40–49	26	20.6
50–60	22	17.5
Level of education
Bachelor degree	31	24.6
Master degree	64	50.8
Doctoral degree	31	24.60
Years of experience (years)
2–5	76	60.0
6–10	45	35.7
>10	5	4.0
Position
Head of the internal audit function	20	16.00
Secretary of the internal audit function	8	6.00
Supervisor of the internal audit function	35	28.00
Internal auditor	63	50.00
Number of professional certifications
1–3	89	71.0
3–5	13	10.0
>5	10	7.9
No professional certifications	14	11.11

Sources: Author’s work.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics.

Construct	Theoritical range	Actual range	Mean	SD	Percentile 50%	Percentile 90%
TP	1–7	1.00–7.00	2.77	1.04	4.00	2.60
TPC	10–70	2.20–6.90	4.21	0.91	5.40	4.20
RPC	8–56	1.25–7.00	5.37	1.12	6.63	5.50
BO	9–63	1.56–7.00	3.77	0.90	4.72	3.67
JOBS	6–42	1.00–7.00	5.34	0.00	6.75	5.50
RAQ	13–91	1.00–7.00	2.99	0.00	4.54	2.77

Notes: TP: time pressure; TPC: transactional psychological contract; RPC: relational psychological contract; BO: burnout; JOBS: job satisfaction; RAQ: reduced audit quality.

Source: Table by authors.

Table 3. Evaluation of the measurement model and collinearity.

Construct	Item	Loading	Composite reliability	AVE	VIF
TP	TBP1	0.861	0.902	0.698	2.294
	TBP2	0.924			3.518
	TBP3	0.735			1.7
	TBP5	0.812			1.884
TPC	TPC 2	0.657	0.835	0.63	1.255
	TPC 3	0.863			1.5
	TPC8	0.845			1.62
RPC	RPC2	0.614	0.922	0.631	1.588
	RPC3	0.807			2.421
	RPC4	0.737			2.061
	RPC5	0.884			4.404
	RPC6	0.882			4.484
	RPC7	0.78			2.115
	RPC8	0.823			2.594
JOBS	JOS1	0.887	0.958	0.793	3.731
	JOS2	0.885			3.484
	JOS3	0.919			4.935
	JOS4	0.871			3.824
	JOS5	0.916			4.379
	JOS6	0.865			2.808
BO	BO1	0.729	0.895	0.59	1.849
	BO2	0.617			1.497
	BO3	0.796			2.014
	BO7	0.839			2.651
	BO8	0.79			2.614
	BO9	0.814			2.392
RAQ	R	0.705	0.953	0.693	1.949
	R	0.791			3
	R	0.805			3.084
	R	0.891			4.197
	R	0.886			4.112
	R	0.825			3.1
	R	0.861			3.102
	R	0.868			4.487
	R	0.845			3.917

Source: Table by authors.

Table 4. Square root of AVE.

	BO	JOS	RAQ	RPC	TP	TPC
BO	0.768
JOS	−0.302	0.891
RAQ	0.56	−0.331	0.833
RPC	−0.339	0.541	−0.246	0.794
TP	0.422	−0.273	0.403	−0.364	0.836
TPC	0.306	0.052	0.166	−0.038	0.168	0.794

Source: Table by authors.

Table 5. Heterotrait-monotrait ratio.

	BO	JOS	RAQ	RPC	TP	TPC
BO
JOS	0.313
RAQ	0.605	0.344
RPC	0.359	0.581	0.258
TP	0.47	0.302	0.437	0.397
TPC	0.383	0.164	0.21	0.124	0.24

Source: Table by authors.

Table 6. Structural model assessment.

Structural relation	Path coefficient	Standard errors	t Statistic	p Values	Test*
H1: TP–>BO	0.283	0.123	2.296	0.011	Accepted
H2: TP–>RAQ	0.189	0.104	1.820	0.034	Accepted
H3: TPC–>BO	0.262	0.081	3.235	0.001	Accepted
H4: TPC–>RAQ	0.009	0.096	0.098	0.461	Rejected
H5: RPC–>BO	−0.137	0.127	1.074	0.141	Rejected
H6: RPC–>RAQ	0.074	0.101	0.734	0.231	Rejected
H7: JOS–>BO	−0.164	0.118	1.396	0.081	Rejected
H8:JOS–>RAQ	−0.185	0.106	1.743	0.041	Accepted
H9: BO–>RAQ	0.447	0.131	3.399	0.000	Accepted

*One-tailed testing: the significance value is 0.05.

Source: Table by authors.

Data availability statement

Please contact the following email: [email protected], if there are questions regarding the data and questionnaire items in this study, the authors are willing to provide complete information.