The Impact of Audit Committee Skepticism and Reward Power on Auditor Communications with the Audit Committee

IF 0.7 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE
G. Krishnamoorthy, A. Wright, Nicole S. Wright
{"title":"The Impact of Audit Committee Skepticism and Reward Power on Auditor Communications with the Audit Committee","authors":"G. Krishnamoorthy, A. Wright, Nicole S. Wright","doi":"10.2308/bria-2022-024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Auditing standards emphasize the importance of strong auditor communications with the audit committee to enhance financial reporting quality. This study examines the effects of audit committee skepticism and reward power, two pervasive audit committee characteristics, on auditor communications with the audit committee. Drawing on accountability theory, we predict and find that greater audit committee skepticism and reward power induce the auditor to communicate more information and report on a more timely basis. Seventy-nine audit partners and managers participated in an experiment where we manipulate between-subjects high or low audit committee skepticism (quantity of probing questions) and high or low reward power (exercising full authority to hire/compensate the auditor versus relying on management). Participants responded to a realistic case regarding an inventory obsolescence issue. A follow-up experiment with 30 participants indicates significant mediation for accountability. The findings underscore the importance of audit committee skepticism and reward power in enhancing auditor communications.","PeriodicalId":46356,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Research in Accounting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Research in Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/bria-2022-024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Auditing standards emphasize the importance of strong auditor communications with the audit committee to enhance financial reporting quality. This study examines the effects of audit committee skepticism and reward power, two pervasive audit committee characteristics, on auditor communications with the audit committee. Drawing on accountability theory, we predict and find that greater audit committee skepticism and reward power induce the auditor to communicate more information and report on a more timely basis. Seventy-nine audit partners and managers participated in an experiment where we manipulate between-subjects high or low audit committee skepticism (quantity of probing questions) and high or low reward power (exercising full authority to hire/compensate the auditor versus relying on management). Participants responded to a realistic case regarding an inventory obsolescence issue. A follow-up experiment with 30 participants indicates significant mediation for accountability. The findings underscore the importance of audit committee skepticism and reward power in enhancing auditor communications.
审计委员会的怀疑和奖励权对审计师与审计委员会沟通的影响
审计准则强调审计师与审计委员会进行强有力的沟通对提高财务报告质量的重要性。本研究考察了审计委员会怀疑论和奖励权这两个普遍存在的审计委员会特征对审计师与审计委员会沟通的影响。根据问责制理论,我们预测并发现,审计委员会的怀疑态度和奖励权力越大,审计师就越能及时地传达更多信息和报告。79名审计合作伙伴和管理人员参与了一项实验,在该实验中,我们在受试者之间操纵审计委员会的高或低怀疑态度(探究问题的数量)和高或低奖励权力(行使雇用/补偿审计师的全部权力与依赖管理层)。与会者回答了一个关于库存过时问题的现实案例。一项有30名参与者参加的后续实验表明,问责制具有重要的中介作用。审计结果强调了审计委员会怀疑论和奖励权在加强审计师沟通方面的重要性。
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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
11
×
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