Dimensions of Competence in an Accounting Domain

Research in the area of competence suggests that familiarity with a domain affects decision making. We extend Heath and Tversky's (1991) competence hypothesis research by examining the following propositions: (1) competence increases the propensity to take credit for success and place blame for failure, and (2) professional accountants' feelings of competence can be altered, as measured by the propensity to take credit for success and place blame for failure, by calling attention to what others know relative to what they know. Participants in the experimental study were accountants with varying levels of tax experience. Results indicated that more competent participants took more credit for being right, and placed more blame externally for being wrong, than did less competent participants. Also, participants who were told about an applicable tax regulation that was not available during the experiment took more blame for being wrong, suggesting that competence is affected by features of the context in which professional tasks are performed.

[1]  Geoffrey B. Sprinkle,et al.  The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: theories, evidence, and a framework for research , 2002 .

[2]  M. Zuckerman,et al.  Motivational Factors Affecting Performance , 1988 .

[3]  G. W. Bradley.  Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question. , 1978 .

[4]  B. Weiner.  An attributional theory of motivation and emotion , 1986 .

[5]  A. Ellis,et al.  A new guide to rational living , 1976 .

[6]  B. Weiner.  Achievement Motivation and Attribution Theory , 1974 .

[7]  Richard R. Lau,et al.  Attributions in the Sports Pages , 1980 .

[8]  A. Bandura.  Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. , 1977, Psychological review.

[9]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[10]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[11]  D. Cox,et al.  An Analysis of Transformations , 1964 .

[12]  Barry L. Lewis,et al.  Determinants of Auditor Expertise , 1990 .

[13]  James Shanteau,et al.  Personal attributes of expert auditors , 1992 .

[14]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[15]  A. Bandura.  Recycling misconceptions of perceived self-efficacy , 1984, Cognitive Therapy and Research.

[16]  K. Taylor.  Testing credit and blame attributions as explanation for choices under ambiguity , 1995 .

[17]  William B. Swann,et al.  Agreeable fancy or disagreeable truth? Reconciling self-enhancement and self-verification. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? , 1975 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty , 1991 .

[20]  Robert Libby,et al.  Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: Ability, knowledge, motivation , 1993 .

[21]  B. Weiner.  Human Motivation: Metaphors, Theories, and Research , 1980 .

[22]  B. Weiner.  An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. , 1985, Psychological review.

[23]  Eliot R. Smith,et al.  Limits on perception of cognitive processes: A reply to Nisbett and Wilson. , 1978 .