<![CDATA[Fraud in financial reporting has become increasingly sophisticated, requiring auditors to apply more rigorous audit procedures and exercise strong professional judgment. This study examines the effect of financial audit procedures on fraud detection and investigates whether professional skepticism moderates this relationship. Using a quantitative causal approach, data were collected through questionnaires distributed to 100 auditors working in public accounting firms in DKI Jakarta. The data were analyzed using regression analysis and Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA). The results show that financial audit procedures have a positive and significant effect on fraud detection, indicating that systematic and well-implemented audit procedures improve auditors’ ability to identify indications of fraud. Professional skepticism also has a positive direct effect on fraud detection, suggesting that auditors with higher levels of critical evaluation and caution are more effective in assessing audit evidence. However, the interaction effect between financial audit procedures and professional skepticism is not significant, indicating that professional skepticism does not moderate the relationship between audit procedures and fraud detection. These findings suggest that professional skepticism functions more as an independent behavioral capability than as a moderating condition. This study contributes to audit literature by providing empirical evidence from auditors in DKI Jakarta and offers practical implications for public accounting firms to strengthen both procedural audit quality and auditors’ skeptical judgment. Keywords: financial audit procedures, fraud detection, professional skepticism, auditors, moderated regression analysis]]>
Copyrights © 2026
