The importance of JUDGMENT in auditing is vital. JUDGMENT in auditing is the most important factor in decision making, and auditors are required to make decisions and JUDGMENTs in many work areas. Therefore, it is important to identify the factors that affect the JUDGMENT and decision-making of auditors.Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify and prioritize the factors affecting professional JUDGMENT and decision-making of auditors using fuzzy screening technique. The present study was conducted in one-year period from esfand ( the final month of iranian calender) 2016 to esfand 2017.First, by examining the literature related to the research topic, the factors influencing the judgement and decision-making of auditors were identified, then using the opinions of 15 experts (Iranian certified public accountants and faculty members) and using fuzzy screening technique 40 indicators were identified. Finally, using fuzzy RANKING, the importance degree of these factors were determined.The results of testing the research hypotheses show that the environmental, functional and behavioral structures of the auditor have the greatest impact on the professional JUDGMENT and decision-making of auditors in Iran, respectively. Also, the auditors' fees, auditors' accountability, financial and competitive conditions of the auditing profession, auditors' independence and the auditors' attempt to satisfy the customer are the most important and effective factors influencing the professional JUDGMENT and decision-making of auditors in Iran.

Purpose: Aims to identify the role of document readability level and the objective complexity of the work task on students' relevance JUDGMENT and document RANKING.Methods: Quantitative content analysis was utilized to determine the readability level of texts. The statistical population of the research included 2825 graduate students of Shiraz University of Humanities. To determine the sample size, due to time-consuming process of relevance JUDGMENT, students’ time constraint, and sample size of similar studies, a non-probability sampling method of voluntary type was used. Two work tasks were designed based on Borland's (2000) Repository of Assigned Search Tasks and experts' opinions. After confirming the validity of the work tasks by the experts, searching through the Persian article databases, including SID, Magiran, and Noormags, four relevant, four partially relevant, and two irrelevant articles were selected by five experts The articles were divided into difficult and very difficult levels by determining their readability levels using Flash-Diani readability formula. In the next step, ten articles related to two work tasks were scored by users in a six-level spectrum (from entirely irrelevant to entirely relevant) then ranked based on the relevance degree (from 1 to 10). Data was analyzed using social science statistical software version 23 (SPSS), and T-tests and Mann-Whitney U tests were conducted.Findings: The results showed significant difference between students' relevance JUDGMENT with different readability levels. Students rated documents with difficult readability levels more relevant than documents with very difficult readability levels. In addition, considering the role of readability level on the RANKING, there was a significant difference between the RANKINGs of relevance in the documents with different readability levels according to the students. Documents with difficult readability levels were ranked lower in terms of relevance. Therefore, students performed finer on rating documents with difficult readability levels.  Findings about the role of complexity level of work showed that objective complexity of the work task affected the students' relevance JUDGMENT. The retrieved documents related to the simple work task were found to be more relevant than the complex work task. Regarding the role of complexity level of work tasks on RANKING, findings  revealed that the level of objective complexity of the work task affected the RANKING of documents, and the simple work task ranked lower in terms of relevance RANKING. Therefore, students performed finer on the simple work task than on the complex work task regarding relevance rating.Conclusion: The role of level of readability of documents and objective complexity of the task affected relevance, JUDGMENT, and RANKING. Further research on the effect of these indicators on relevance JUDGMENT  can improve the design of information retrieval systems and increase the quality of the relevance and RANKING algorithms.

The current study investigated whether the cognitive neuroscience dimension affects auditors’ JUDGMENT in an increasingly competitive emerging audit market. In addition, other influential dimensions, including “identity characteristics, ” “biological characteristics and moral values and spirituality, ” and “environment” were also considered. The research was a descriptive survey, and the statistical population consisted of independent auditors. The field survey and questionnaire were used for data collection. The results generally showed that the cognitive neuroscience dimension affects auditors’ JUDGMENT positively. Among the examined factors, “the auditor’s selectivity about which problems to solve, ” “the auditor’s level of attention, ” and “the level of concentration” were the most important factors. In addition, other investigated dimensions, including “identity characteristics, ” “biological characteristics and moral values and spirituality, ” and “environment, ” were considered influential factors. The findings imply that different neuroscience factors that require more research in this area affect auditors’ JUDGMENT and performance. Studying cognitive neuroscience factors as a novel stance to the audit literature can help auditors improve their professional JUDGMENTs and opinions, resulting in reduced audit risk and increased audit quality. It can also help develop a new era in interdisciplinary studies via associating decision-making with cognitive theories and implementing neuroscience related technologies.

According to the common view, as we know, knowledge, in the entire history of western epistemology, was defined as the justified true belief that the JUDGMENT is one of its constituents. In this essay, however, considering some philosophical writings of Descartes and John Lock, we will show that this is not a correct view. Then, we will illustrate that it was only after Emanuel Kant that the connection between knowledge and JUDGMENT has been occurred. We also emphasize that in spite of the fact that in many cases, especially in the sciences realm, propositional knowledge is the only type of knowledge that can be accepted, there are many cases that propositional knowledge is not efficacy.

JUDGMENT of bankruptcy leads to bankruptcy of merchant. Therefore, merchant will be incapable and cannot possess in his asset. Various provisions can be found in commercial code, regarding contract’s of bankrupt merchant, which is inconsistent with civil code. Article 423 has stipulated that trades of merchant after bankruptcy, in three cases will be void. This position is not consistent with civil code which implies that transactions which are against the benefit of merchant is dependent on verification of debtors are invalid ones. The last step to remove incapacity from bankrupt merchant is rehabilitation of bankruptcy. However rehabilitation of bankruptcy of corporate is doubtful. Because of survival of juristic personality until at end of liquidation of a company and general interpretation of “any bankrupt merchant”, rehabilitation of juristic personality is acceptable.