This integrative review synthesises research on ethical decision-making in accounting through Rest's four-component model of moral sensitivity, judgment, intention, and action. Drawing on a systematic synthesis of fifteen prominent theoretical and empirical frameworks, the study examines how moral idealism, relativism, peer pressure, social responsibility, and moral self-efficacy shape ethical conduct among accountants and auditors. The findings reveal that ethical behaviour emerges from a sequential process where failures can occur at any stage, with peer pressure acting as a powerful yet context-dependent distorting force, and moral self-efficacy serving as the critical link between intention and action. The synthesis identifies a persistent "ethical viewpoint gap" the systemic divergence between formal ethical codes and actual decision-making behaviour which manifests at intra-individual, organisational, socio-technical, and institutional levels. The study provides a refined mapping of antecedents onto Rest's sequential model, offers a context-sensitive item pool for questionnaire development, and presents evidence-based leverage points for ethics training, audit firm policy, educational reform, and regulatory intervention. Methodologically, the integrative review privileges contextualised, interpretive synthesis across diverse research traditions to surface mechanisms and moderators often overlooked by standard survey instruments. While the primary contributions lie in the detailed mapping of ethical decision-making processes, the findings also carry broader implications for institutional accountability and responsible governance. Limitations include the predominance of Western-centric studies and the need for empirical validation of the proposed model in non-Western contexts using stage-sensitive instruments.