Conspiracy illusion and auditors’ professional skepticism: the moderating roles of tolerance for ambiguity and religious attitude

Purpose This study aims to investigate how conspiracy illusion (CI) is associated with auditors’ professional skepticism (PS) and examines whether tolerance for ambiguity (TA) and religious attitude (RA) moderate this relationship. While PS is central to audit quality, auditors’ judgments may be shaped by belief-driven cognitive tendencies that are related to deviations from evidence-based reasoning. The study addresses the limited understanding of how conspiracy-oriented cognition operates within professional auditing contexts. Design/methodology/approach Using a survey-based research design, data are collected from 300 external auditors employed by the Iranian Audit Organization and private audit firms. Established multi-item scales are used to measure CI, PS, TA and RA. Hypotheses are tested using partial least squares structural equation modeling, including interaction terms to assess moderating effects. Findings The results show a strong negative association between CI and PS. Further analysis reveals that TA is associated with a weaker negative relationship, suggesting that auditors who report higher TA exhibit a weaker negative association between CI and PS. RA also moderates the relationship, and the data indicate that stronger RAs are associated with a weaker negative association between CI and PS. Additional analyses show that CI is positively associated with presumptive doubt and negatively associated with neutrality, highlighting an imbalance in the components of skepticism. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is among the first to introduce CI as a cognitive correlate of PS in auditing. By integrating cognitive bias and motivated reasoning perspectives and providing evidence from an emerging market context, the study extends behavioral auditing research and offers practical insights for auditor training, selection and regulatory oversight.