Introduction

Teamwork is an essential work arrangement for managing complex and dynamic tasks. In professional service settings such as auditing, effective teamwork is particularly important because audit engagements require coordination, knowledge sharing, and collective professional judgment. The increasing complexity of accounting standards, financial transactions, and stakeholder expectations has further emphasized collaboration in audit teams (Sidgman et al., 2021). However, teamwork may also create behavioral challenges that reduce group effectiveness. One such challenge is social loafing, defined as the tendency of individuals to exert less effort when working collectively than when working individually (Latané et al., 1979).

The concept can be traced to Ringelmann’s experiments, which showed that individual effort may decline as group size increases (Ringelmann, 1913). According to social impact theory, responsibility may become diffused in groups, reducing individual accountability and motivation (Latané, 1981). In auditing, social loafing may be particularly problematic because audit quality depends on individual diligence, responsibility, professional skepticism, and adequate documentation. Reduced effort may therefore be associated with incomplete audit procedures, weaker documentation, and lower audit-team performance.

Although social loafing has been studied in organizational and educational settings, empirical evidence on factors associated with it in audit teams remains limited, particularly in Iran. This study therefore examines the relationships of role ambiguity, group size, group cohesion, organizational justice, and task visibility with social loafing among audit team members. By integrating structural, perceptual, and interactional factors into one framework, the study contributes to the auditing and organizational behavior literatures.



Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

Several theoretical perspectives explain social loafing. Social impact theory suggests that larger groups may reduce personal accountability and increase the likelihood of reduced effort (Latané, 1981). Social identity theory proposes that individuals who strongly identify with their groups are more willing to contribute to collective goals (Van Knippenberg, 2000). Social exchange theory further suggests that perceptions of fairness shape employee motivation and organizational behavior (Colquitt, 2001).

Role ambiguity may be positively associated with social loafing because unclear responsibilities can weaken accountability and motivation (Yalçın, 2023).

H1: Role ambiguity is positively and significantly associated with social loafing among audit team members.

Group size is an important structural factor associated with social loafing. Larger groups may diffuse responsibility and be accompanied by lower individual effort (Hüffmeier et al., 2022).

H2: Group size is positively and significantly associated with social loafing among audit team members.

Group cohesion may be negatively associated with social loafing because cohesive groups foster trust, commitment, and cooperation (Carless & De Paola, 2000; Simms & Nichols, 2014).

H3: Group cohesion is negatively and significantly associated with social loafing among audit team members.

Organizational justice is expected to be negatively associated with social loafing because perceptions of fairness may strengthen engagement and commitment (Mortazavi et al., 2012).

H4: Organizational justice is negatively and significantly associated with social loafing among audit team members.

Task visibility may be negatively associated with social loafing because visible and measurable individual contributions enhance accountability (George, 1992).

H5: Task visibility is negatively and significantly associated with social loafing among audit team members.



Methodology

This quantitative, applied, cross-sectional, survey-based study collected data in 2025 from auditors and junior auditors working in audit firms that are members of the Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants. These occupational levels were selected because they are directly involved in audit procedures and team activities.

Using convenience sampling, 370 questionnaires were distributed online and in paper form. A total of 193 were returned, yielding a response rate of 52.2%. After incomplete questionnaires were excluded, 155 usable responses remained, representing 41.9% of all distributed questionnaires.

The variables were measured using scales adapted from prior research. Social loafing was measured using Zhu et al. (2019), role ambiguity using Fazli Aghghaleh et al. (2014), organizational justice using Niehoff and Moorman (1993) and Kim and Leung (2007), group cohesion using Lieb et al. (2024), and task visibility using George (1992). Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Group size was measured directly as the actual number of audit-team members, and work experience was included as a control variable. Multi-item latent constructs were specified as reflective.

Data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in SmartPLS 3. Reliability and validity were assessed through factor loadings, Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability, average variance extracted (AVE), and the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT). The structural model was evaluated using path coefficients, t-values, R², Q², and variance inflation factor values (Hair et al., 2022).



Findings

The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity. Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability values exceeded 0.70, AVE values were above 0.50, and HTMT values supported discriminant validity. The structural model also showed acceptable predictive power.

Role ambiguity was not significantly associated with social loafing. This suggests that unclear responsibilities may not necessarily be accompanied by lower individual effort in audit teams. Professional standards, established audit procedures, and supervisory mechanisms may provide sufficient guidance even when some ambiguity exists.

Group size was positively and significantly associated with social loafing. This finding supports the Ringelmann effect and social impact theory, suggesting that larger audit teams may be associated with weaker individual accountability and a greater likelihood of free-riding behavior.

Group cohesion was negatively and significantly associated with social loafing. Trust, positive interpersonal relationships, and a sense of belonging may encourage auditors to contribute more actively to collective objectives, making cohesive teams less vulnerable to reduced individual effort (Simms & Nichols, 2014).

Organizational justice also had a negative and significant relationship with social loafing. Auditors who perceive fairness in organizational procedures, evaluations, and interactions may show greater motivation and commitment to group tasks. This result is consistent with social exchange theory (Colquitt, 2001).

Task visibility was negatively and significantly associated with social loafing. When individual contributions are visible and measurable, auditors may feel more accountable and be less likely to reduce their effort (George, 1992). Work experience, included as a control variable, was also negatively and significantly associated with social loafing, indicating that more experienced auditors reported lower levels of this behavior.



Discussion and Implications

Overall, social loafing in audit teams was associated with structural, perceptual, and interactional factors. Group size was associated with higher levels of social loafing, whereas group cohesion, organizational justice, and task visibility were associated with lower levels. Audit firms may therefore help limit social loafing by optimizing team size, strengthening cohesion, promoting fairness, and increasing transparency in performance evaluation.

The study contributes to auditing research by providing evidence on factors associated with social loafing in Iranian audit teams. It also extends organizational behavior research by integrating several correlates of social loafing into a unified framework.

The study has several limitations. It relied on self-reported data and a cross-sectional design, which limits causal interpretation. The sample was also restricted to auditors and junior auditors in Iranian audit firms, reducing generalizability. Future studies may use longitudinal or mixed-method designs, broader samples, and multiple data sources. They may also examine leadership style, organizational culture, time pressure, intrinsic motivation, and other contextual factors relevant to social loafing in professional service settings.