Discretionary-Accruals Models and Audit Qualifications

Eli Bartov, F. Gul, J. Tsui
{"title":"Discretionary-Accruals Models and Audit Qualifications","authors":"Eli Bartov, F. Gul, J. Tsui","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.214996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary objective of this study is to evaluate empirically the ability of two cross-sectional models, the Cross-Sectional Jones Model and the Cross-Sectional Modified Jones Model, to detect earnings management vis-a-vis their time-series counterparts. The motivation follows because these two cross-sectional models have not been formally evaluated by prior research, and because their use offers substantial advantages to investors and researchers over their time-series counterparts. A secondary objective is to assess the robustness of findings of prior studies assessing discretionary-accruals models using our new sample and research method, which controls for potential research confounds. The evaluation involves examining the association between discretionary accruals and audit qualifications, using a sample of 166 distinct firms with qualified audit reports and a matched-pair control sample with clean audit reports. An association between large discretionary accruals generated by a model and an audit qualification provides evidence on the ability of the model to detect earnings management. Results from univariate tests that do not control for potential research confounds show that all models, except the DeAngelo Model, are consistently successful in discriminating between firms that manage earnings. Once potential research confounds are controlled, however, only the two cross-sectional models are able to detect earnings management. This last result, which highlights the importance of controlling for research confounds in earnings management studies using carefully selected samples, implies that the cross-sectional models are superior to their time-series counterparts. This finding is particularly important for future earnings management research because using a cross-sectional model rather than its time-series counterpart should result in a larger sample size that is less subject to a survivorship bias, and will also allow examining samples of firms with short history.","PeriodicalId":124312,"journal":{"name":"New York University Stern School of Business Research Paper Series","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"961","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New York University Stern School of Business Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.214996","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 961

Abstract

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate empirically the ability of two cross-sectional models, the Cross-Sectional Jones Model and the Cross-Sectional Modified Jones Model, to detect earnings management vis-a-vis their time-series counterparts. The motivation follows because these two cross-sectional models have not been formally evaluated by prior research, and because their use offers substantial advantages to investors and researchers over their time-series counterparts. A secondary objective is to assess the robustness of findings of prior studies assessing discretionary-accruals models using our new sample and research method, which controls for potential research confounds. The evaluation involves examining the association between discretionary accruals and audit qualifications, using a sample of 166 distinct firms with qualified audit reports and a matched-pair control sample with clean audit reports. An association between large discretionary accruals generated by a model and an audit qualification provides evidence on the ability of the model to detect earnings management. Results from univariate tests that do not control for potential research confounds show that all models, except the DeAngelo Model, are consistently successful in discriminating between firms that manage earnings. Once potential research confounds are controlled, however, only the two cross-sectional models are able to detect earnings management. This last result, which highlights the importance of controlling for research confounds in earnings management studies using carefully selected samples, implies that the cross-sectional models are superior to their time-series counterparts. This finding is particularly important for future earnings management research because using a cross-sectional model rather than its time-series counterpart should result in a larger sample size that is less subject to a survivorship bias, and will also allow examining samples of firms with short history.
可自由支配应计项目模型和审计资格
本研究的主要目的是实证评估两个横截面模型的能力,横截面琼斯模型和横截面修正琼斯模型,以检测盈余管理相对于他们的时间序列对应物。动机如下,因为这两个横截面模型尚未被先前的研究正式评估,因为它们的使用为投资者和研究人员提供了比时间序列模型更大的优势。第二个目标是评估使用我们的新样本和研究方法评估任意应计模型的先前研究结果的稳健性,该方法控制了潜在的研究混淆。评估包括检查可自由支配应计项目与审计资格之间的关系,使用166家具有合格审计报告的不同公司的样本和具有干净审计报告的配对对照样本。一个模型产生的大额可自由支配应计利润与审计资格之间的关联,为该模型发现盈余管理的能力提供了证据。单变量测试的结果没有控制潜在的研究混淆表明,除DeAngelo模型外,所有模型在区分管理收益的公司方面都是一致成功的。然而,一旦潜在的研究混淆得到控制,只有两个横截面模型能够检测盈余管理。最后一个结果强调了在使用精心挑选的样本进行盈余管理研究时控制研究混淆的重要性,这意味着横截面模型优于时间序列模型。这一发现对未来的盈余管理研究尤其重要,因为使用横断面模型而不是时间序列模型应该会产生更大的样本量,从而减少生存偏差的影响,并且还可以检查历史较短的公司样本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信