Cognitive biases, i.e. systematic patterns of deviation from rationality, significantly affect accounting judgment and decision making (such as misinterpreting financial data), leading to adverse consequences for businesses, organisations, and society. Despite widespread acknowledgment of these effects in behavioural accounting research, there is a noticeable absence of a comprehensive review of cognitive biases. We reviewed 139 accounting articles dealing with cognitive biases in accounting judgment and decision making. We organise the literature according to the impact of cognitive biases among audit, financial accounting, and management accounting disciplines and related tasks. In doing that, we provide a typology of biases in accounting judgment and decision making considering their different antecedents – namely, easy attribution biases, emotional-driven biases, and frame dependence biases. Moreover, a future research agenda is proposed. This includes exploring overlooked biases, studying biases that may positively impact specific tasks, examining interactions and conflicts between biases, and exploring the interaction between professionals and supporting technologies (e.g. Artificial Intelligence) in understanding cognitive biases’ study, formation, and reduction.

Camilli, R., Cristofaro, M., Hristov, I., Sargiacomo, M. (2025). Cognitive Biases in Accounting Judgment and Decision Making: A Review, a Typology, and a Future Research Agenda. ACCOUNTING FORUM, 49(5), 1038-1067 [10.1080/01559982.2024.2434340].

Cognitive Biases in Accounting Judgment and Decision Making: A Review, a Typology, and a Future Research Agenda.

Camilli R.;Cristofaro M.;Hristov I.;
2025-01-02

Abstract

Cognitive biases, i.e. systematic patterns of deviation from rationality, significantly affect accounting judgment and decision making (such as misinterpreting financial data), leading to adverse consequences for businesses, organisations, and society. Despite widespread acknowledgment of these effects in behavioural accounting research, there is a noticeable absence of a comprehensive review of cognitive biases. We reviewed 139 accounting articles dealing with cognitive biases in accounting judgment and decision making. We organise the literature according to the impact of cognitive biases among audit, financial accounting, and management accounting disciplines and related tasks. In doing that, we provide a typology of biases in accounting judgment and decision making considering their different antecedents – namely, easy attribution biases, emotional-driven biases, and frame dependence biases. Moreover, a future research agenda is proposed. This includes exploring overlooked biases, studying biases that may positively impact specific tasks, examining interactions and conflicts between biases, and exploring the interaction between professionals and supporting technologies (e.g. Artificial Intelligence) in understanding cognitive biases’ study, formation, and reduction.
2-gen-2025
Pubblicato
Rilevanza internazionale
Articolo
Esperti anonimi
Settore ECON-06/A - Economia aziendale
English
Con Impact Factor ISI
Accounting, judgment, decision making, biases
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01559982.2024.2434340
Camilli, R., Cristofaro, M., Hristov, I., Sargiacomo, M. (2025). Cognitive Biases in Accounting Judgment and Decision Making: A Review, a Typology, and a Future Research Agenda. ACCOUNTING FORUM, 49(5), 1038-1067 [10.1080/01559982.2024.2434340].
Camilli, R; Cristofaro, M; Hristov, I; Sargiacomo, M
Articolo su rivista
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Camilli et al. 2025_Biases in accounting.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 1.37 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.37 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2108/398589
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact