Nationality and differences in auditor risk assessment: A research note with experimental evidence

This study examines whether auditors from different countries come to different conclusions when they perform analytical procedures to assess the risk of misstatement in accounts. During a laboratory experiment, auditors who worked for the same firm in the United Kingdom, France, and the United States performed analytical procedures on identical case materials. Although auditors from all three countries came to similar conclusions about the overall risk of misstatement, they attributed risk differently across the individual financial statement accounts they evaluated.     

An Experimental Study of Auditor Analytical Review Judgements

This paper provides evidence as to how five factors highlighted in the current UK auditing standard are taken into account by auditors in analytical review (AR) judgements. While the relative importance of particular cues was generally found to be consistent with the standard, certain factors were taken into account only to a marginal extent. Little evidence of configural cue usage was identified. The study also provides evidence of a tendency towards conservatism in the way auditors approach AR. The results suggest both that the potential to substitute AR for other substantive procedures may be realised only imperfectly and that the issue of configural reasoning should be addressed in the auditing standard.     

An Experimental Study of Auditor Analytical Review Judgements

This paper provides evidence as to how five factors highlighted in the current UK auditing standard are taken into account by auditors in analytical review (AR) judgements. While the relative importance of particular cues was generally found to be consistent with the standard, certain factors were taken into account only to a marginal extent. Little evidence of configural cue usage was identified. The study also provides evidence of a tendency towards conservatism in the way auditors approach AR. The results suggest both that the potential to substitute AR for other substantive procedures may be realised only imperfectly and that the issue of configural reasoning should be addressed in the auditing standard.     

Auditor liability: A comparison of judge and juror verdicts

This research examines differences between judges and jurors in rendering liability judgments in auditor litigation cases. While any number of case contexts would allow us to contrast and compare judges and jurors, we chose one that we believed would also address a second timely issue, auditor reliance or non-reliance upon the work of others. Within the general context of litigation of an alleged audit failure, we manipulated, between-participants, external auditor reliance on the work of others (relied on outsourced work, relied on in-house internal auditors’ work or did not rely). Our results show differences in the liability assessments of judges and jurors. Judges assign more liability to auditors that rely on the work of in-house internal auditors, less liability to auditors that rely on outsourced internal auditors and the least liability to auditors that choose not to rely on the work of internal auditors (but re-perform the work themselves) while jurors assess higher liability regardless of the work done by the auditors. Mediation analyses suggests the differences found in the overall liability assessments of jurors and judges are partially driven by their divergent attitudes towards the public accounting profession with jurors’ unfavorable attitudes leading to them assign liability regardless of the work performed. Further analysis suggests juror insensitivity to our reliance manipulations may reflect a strict liability perspective (consistent with prior work by Charron and Lowe (2008)); while judges consider other factors when making liability assessments.     

THE EFFECTS OF PRESENTATION FORMAT ON THE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF AUDITORS‘ ANALYTICAL REVIEW JUDGMENTS

Modern audit practice has focused increasing attention on the use of analytical review procedures to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of audits. To assist in this endeavour, one branch of analytical review research has investigated the judgment processes that auditors' use in analytical review and the development of decision aids to improve these processes. Several recent papers have considered how alternative presentations of financial and operating data, specifically graphs versus tables, may affect the effectiveness of auditors' analytical review judgments. However, the results have been mixed. This study investigated the expectation that there would be effectiveness and efficiency performance advantages for auditors receiving graphically presented data over those receiving tabular presented data in an analytical review setting. This paper reports on the results of an experiment that examined the impact of graphs versus tables on the effectiveness of sales account balance prediction, confidence in this prediction and the setting of a noninvestigation region, and the relative time efficiency with which these tasks were completed, for an analytical review of sales for a retailing client. The study found mixed results for the accuracy of the sales account balance predictions of the graphical and tabular treatment groups, with no difference found when a regression model estimate of the ‘correct’ prediction was used and greater accuracy for the graphical group when the actual audited sales account balance was used as the accuracy benchmark. No significant differences between treatment groups was found for their confidence in their sales account balance predictions and the width of the noninvestigation regions set. However, a significant time advantage was found for the graphical group. These findings suggest that there may a useful role for the use of graphs as decision aids in income statement related analytical review procedures in improving audit efficiency without sacrificing audit effectiveness.     

External auditors' willingness to rely on the work of internal auditors: The influence of work style and barriers to cooperation

The extent to which external auditors rely on the work of internal auditors is an important judgment. Recently, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has recommended that external auditors “rely (more) on the work of others” to reduce the greater-than-expected costs associated with compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act. Reliance decisions, however, are complex decision tasks that require professional judgment and may be influenced by a number of factors, both external (environmental) and internal (cognitive and affective), including the auditors' working style and pervious experiences related to barriers to external/internal auditor cooperation (e.g., previously experienced low versus high internal auditor objectivity and/or competence). We experimentally examine these influences in our research reported herein. Consistent with expectations, external auditors' work styles significantly influenced the extent of planned audit testing, internal auditor reliance judgments, and interpretation of analytical procedures results. Auditors' perceptions about internal auditors' competence and objectivity, developed over years of interaction, also influenced these judgments, and interacted with work styles. Inconsistent with expectations, auditor rank (senior versus manager) did not influence judgments.     

Group audits: Are audit quality and price associated with the Lead auditor’s decision to accept responsibility?

Lead auditors frequently rely on work performed by Other auditors, especially when auditing clients with operations in multiple countries. The PCAOB has expressed concern that the quality of such group audits may differ depending on whether the Lead auditor accepts or declines responsibility for work done by Other auditors. The PCAOB also has been concerned with the venue through which Lead auditors and Other auditors disclose their participation in group audits, including disclosure of whether Lead auditors accept or decline responsibility. To investigate these issues, we employ a sample consisting entirely of group audit engagements. We identify Lead auditors taking responsibility from PCAOB Form 2, filed by Other auditors of U.S. registrants for fiscal years 2009 to 2017. We identify Lead auditors not accepting responsibility from audit report disclosures during the same period. The results suggest that Lead auditors accepting responsibility charge higher audit fees but provide audits of no higher quality, and possibly of even lower quality. These results are robust to various additional analyses. Our research contributes to the ongoing debate over how the participation of Other auditors affects audit quality.     

Impact of the timing of receipt of an inherited explanation on auditors' analytical procedures judgements

The present study extends prior research relating to auditors’ analytical procedures (AP) processes in two ways. First, it examines whether the timing of receipt of an inherited explanation (before or after self‐generating explanations) affects auditors’ hypothesis generation. Second, responding to calls to address how the auditors’ performance of the earlier stages of the AP process affects their performance in later stages of that process ( Koonce, 1993 ; Cohen, Krishnamoorthy and Wright, 2000 ) the present study concurrently addresses the hypothesis generation, information search, hypothesis evaluation and final judgement stages of the AP process. Consistent with a facilitation effect, more non‐error explanations were generated by auditors initially inheriting a non‐error explanation. Further, consistent with a recency effect, the initial likelihood assessed for the inherited explanation was higher when it was received after self‐generation of alternatives. Despite these initial differences, the timing of the inherited explanation did not significantly affect the auditors’ information search, evaluation processes or outcome performance (in terms of cause selection). Results relating to the receipt of an inherited explanation were similar, except that significantly fewer subjects not inheriting an explanation selected a cause the same as the inherited explanation. These results suggest that although inheriting an explanation from management does affect the outcome of the AP process, it does not lead to fewer correct outcomes, and highlight the importance of examining the AP process in its entirety rather than in a piecemeal manner.     

The persuasiveness of audit evidence: The case of accounting policy decisions

This study examines how auditors respond to precedents in accounting situations where authoritative guidance does not exist. Three experiments were conducted with practicing audit managers and partners from a Canadian Big Six accounting firm. The results show that auditors rely to a greater extent on precedents that are similar (versus not similar) to the problem situation. When the client's position on the accounting matter was known to the auditor and all available precedents pointed to the same treatment of the accounting issue in question, auditors did not heed the client's position. Rather, they used the available precedents to judge the appropriate accounting. In contrast, when the client's position was known and the available precedents were mixed in their implications for the appropriate accounting treatment, auditors tended to follow the client's position. These results are considered in light of issues of auditor independence and the accounting regulatory environment.     

The impact of cultural environment on entry-level auditors’ abilities to perform analytical procedures

We focus on the impact of three of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and individualism, on the results of analytical procedures conducted by entry-level auditors in Mexico and the U.S. Analytical procedures are ideal for this research as they require auditors to use professional judgment and appropriate levels of professional skepticism, abilities related to all three cultural characteristics. We find no other study investigating the impact of culture on the application of auditing procedures similar across the studied cultures.We find cultural characteristics do not affect the participants’ abilities to predict income statement balances, but they may influence the ability to predict changes in balance sheet accounts. We also find culture is associated with differences in risk assessments. Our results indicate that participants rarely differentiate accounts that change according to expectation from those that change contrary to expectation, but rather alter their risk assessments to match the direction of balances that increase or decrease.     

Auditors' Predisposition to Provide Fair Judgments: Australian Evidence of Auditors' Level of Moral Reasoning

Auditors have a responsibility to provide fair and independent opinions about managemenfs preparation of company financial statements. This study examines auditors' predisposition to provide just and fair judgments, using Kohlberg's theory of developmental moral reasoning, one of the most widely accepted theories in justice psychology. The results indicate that a majority of auditors have the predisposition to act fairly, particularly when faced with an ethical crisis. A smaller number are likely to act in their own self-interest and do the right thing only to avoid punishment. These auditors have the ability to "do deals" and, when faced with an ethical crisis, may tend to focus on their own needs at the expense of others.     

External auditors’ reliance on internal audit: the impact of sourcing arrangements and consulting activities

This study examines the impact of internal audit outsourcing and involvement in consulting on external auditors’ reliance on the work of internal audit. We test whether these factors influence reliance on internal audit work already undertaken and the use of internal auditors as assistants, distinguishing between control evaluation and substantive testing. Involvement in consulting impacts reliance on work undertaken and the use of internal auditors as assistants for control evaluation. External auditors make greater use of internal auditors as assistants for substantive testing when internal audit is provided in‐house. Overall, external auditors use internal audit more for control evaluation tasks.     

Do auditors’ early-life socioeconomic opportunities improve audit quality? Evidence from China

Prior research documents significant variation in audit outcomes based on individual auditors' demographic features, working experience, educational background, and social connections. This study examines whether individual auditors' early-life socioeconomic opportunities also affect audit practices. We expect that auditors from big cities have more access to socioeconomic opportunities and accumulate more human capital in early life, thus are more capable of providing high-quality audits after they start careers. Consistent with this hypothesis, we find that auditors from big cities make more audit adjustments to earnings compared with auditors from small towns. Additional tests suggest that this early-life effect on audit quality is moderated when auditors receive higher education or gain more auditing experience and is more pronounced in downward adjustments than in upward adjustments. We also find a fee premium for auditors from big cities. Overall, this paper provides evidence that auditors’ early-life socioeconomic opportunities have a far-reaching influence on audit quality.     

Pressure and Politics in Financial Accounting Regulation: The Case of the Financial Conglomerates in the Netherlands

This article examines the political process of promulgating two controversial laws which pertain to the reporting of Dutch financial conglomerates. Central to the study is the exploration of the lobbying efforts observed during the process, and the interaction between the government, the supervisors of banks and insurance companies, the industry and its associations, and the users and auditors of annual reports of financial conglomerates. Previous studies in accounting-rule development have often ignored influences that do not fall within the formal regulatory procedures. By adopting an inductive research approach, this study explores in some detail the behaviour of participants, including their use of informal lobbying methods. Pluralist theory is used to explain the nature of the political process and the behaviour of interested parties. The findings indicate that the Dutch political process in accounting matters is indeed pluralistic. Although auditors and producers of accounts seem to have greater possibilities to participate, the users of corporate reports are able to voice their opinion effectively. Overall, the users' preferences were acknowledged in the final rules governing the reporting by financial conglomerates.     

An Examination of the Effect of Hypothesis Framing on Auditors'Information Choices in an Analytical Procedure Task

Libby (1985) contends that auditors'search for and evaluation of audit evidence, particularly during analytical procedures, is influenced by an explicitly or implicitly formulated hypothesis. Often a hypothesis may be'framed'in alternative ways. For example, an auditor may frame analytical procedure results in terms of a'misstatement'or a'non-misstatement'frame. The concern arises that alternatively framed, but otherwise identical, audit issues may be treated differently. This concern has led Kinney and Haynes (1990) to propose modifying auditing standards to direct auditors to adopt a'misstatement'frame. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether alternative analytical procedure frames affect auditors'information choices in an analytical procedure task. An experiment was conducted in which auditors listed which information cues were relevant to explain an unusual financial statement fluctuation. Half of the information cues made a misstatement explanation more plausible whereas half of the information cues made a non-misstatement explanation more plausible. The results indicate that hypothesis frame significantly affected auditors'information choices. Specifically, auditors in the misstatement (non-misstatement) frame select more misstatement (non-misstatement) cues as relevant. The hypothesis frame, however, did not significantly affect probability assessments.     

International evidence on economic policy uncertainty and asymmetric adjustment of audit pricing: Big 4 versus non‐big 4 auditors

By investigating the association between economic policy uncertainty and audit fees using data from eight countries, this study examines whether and how Big 4 auditors reinforce their advantages over non‐Big 4 auditors through audit pricing. We find that both Big 4 and non‐Big 4 auditors reduce their audit fees when economic policy uncertainty increases. However, while non‐Big 4 auditors adjust audit pricing asymmetrically as economic policy uncertainty changes, i.e., the magnitude of decline in audit fees when economic policy uncertainty increases exceeds the magnitude of rise when economic policy uncertainty decreases, Big 4 auditors regulate their audit pricing in a symmetric manner. Further analyses reveal that: (1) the asymmetric pricing of non‐Big 4 auditors mainly exists in countries where Big 4 auditors have dominant market share, (2) Big 4 auditors provide higher‐quality audits when economic policy uncertainty increases and (3) many firms in better financial condition turn to Big 4 auditors during uncertain years. Our findings suggest that the symmetric audit pricing helps Big 4 auditors maintain a favorable position in the audit market.     

Information sharing between mutual funds and auditors

This paper examines whether there is information sharing between mutual funds and their auditors about the auditors’ other listed firm clients. Using data from the Chinese market, we find that mutual funds earn higher profits from trading in firms that share the same auditors. The effects are more pronounced when firms have a more opaque information environment and when the audit partners for the fund and the partners for the listed firm share school ties. The evidence is consistent with information flowing from auditors to mutual funds, providing mutual funds with an information advantage in firms that share the same auditors. Our findings are robust to the use of audit-firm mergers and acquisitions (M&As) as exogenous shocks and several other robustness checks. We further find that auditors benefit by charging higher audit fees for mutual fund clients and by improving their audit quality for listed firm clients. Our study provides evidence of bi-directional information sharing between two important market intermediaries.     

Internal audit reporting lines,fraud risk decomposition,and assessments of fraud risk

The main purpose of this research is to examine the effects of internal audit reporting lines on fraud risk assessments made by internal auditors when the level of fraud risk varies. Significant emphasis has been placed on the importance of reporting lines in maintaining the autonomy of internal auditors, but the perceived benefits of requiring internal audit to report directly to the audit committee have not been validated or systematically investigated. Results of an experiment involving 172 experienced internal auditors and additional survey findings indicate that internal auditors perceive more personal threats when they report high levels of risk directly to the audit committee, relative to management. Perceived threats lead internal auditors to reduce assessed levels of fraud risk when reporting to the audit committee relative to when reporting to management. This finding runs counter to the anticipated benefits of requirements that the internal audit function report directly to the audit committee, and it reveals potential conflicts of interest and independence threats created by the audit committee itself. We also investigate the effects of fraud risk decomposition on risk assessments made by internal auditors. We find that fraud risk assessment decomposition does not have the same effects on internal auditors as it has on external auditors, and the effects of decomposition do not align with the expected benefits of decomposition.