The exercise of audit judgment is essential because it is impractical to perform an audit on all types of evidence. These types of evidence are considered in forming an opinion on audited financial statements, making audit judgment a determinant of the audit’s outcome. The objective of this research is to analyze the factors that affect an auditor’s judgment and decision making (JDM) during an audit. This study used an exploratory research design, with the factor analysis approach as its methodology. However, the data were collected using the questionnaire method. The questionnaire was sent to all member auditors of the Lebanese Association of Certified Public Accountants (LACPA). A total of 310 completed questionnaires were collected and analyzed. The data analysis findings indicate that the auditor’s JDM throughout the audit process is affected by three factors: personal, task, and environmental factors. The auditor’s personal factor becomes the dominant factor because it has the largest eigenvalue of 7.949. These findings demonstrate the complex and diverse nature of auditor judgment, highlighting the significance of considering audit JDM factors. Therefore, auditors may improve their abilities to make informed and effective judgments throughout the audit process by acknowledging the importance of personal, task, and environmental factors.

This study aims to examine how audit judgment and decision-making (JDM) is impacted by personal variables, task factors, and environmental factors. Audit judgment is crucial for forming opinions on financial statements since it is not feasible to conduct an audit on every type of evidence. We sent a questionnaire to all auditors who are members of the Lebanese Association of Certified Public Accountants (LACPA) in order to collect the data. Before analysis, we collected and completed 310 questionnaires for the study. We employed various statistical analyses, such as multiple linear regression analysis, data quality tests, and regression assumptions tests, to examine the relationships between different factors and JDM. The findings of the study showed that there is a positive association between factors like professional skepticism, the use of decision aids, professional commitment, the structure of tasks, time pressure, and the effectiveness of corporate governance/internal controls, and audit JDM. Conversely, adverse correlations emerge between factors like knowledge levels, task complexity, and the level of accountability, and audit JDM. However, there were no statistically significant correlations between audit JDM and factors including skills, experience, familiarity, trust, professional development, relationships with audit firms, and group or individual information processing. By being aware of and recognizing these effects, audit companies in Lebanon may put strategies in place to improve the quality of JDM and the trustworthiness of audit results.