审计程序无效:审计报告错误的证据

IF 1.1 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Brooke D. Beyer, Michelle A. Draeger, Eric T. Rapley
{"title":"审计程序无效:审计报告错误的证据","authors":"Brooke D. Beyer, Michelle A. Draeger, Eric T. Rapley","doi":"10.1108/jal-09-2023-0159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe process performed during a financial statement audit is critical but is unobservable to external stakeholders. This can create challenges in assessing the quality of individual audit engagements. This study’s objective is to introduce and investigate an archival measure based on publicly available information that proxies for audit process ineffectiveness.Design/methodology/approachWe proxy for audit process ineffectiveness using errors in the audit report. We examine audit reports to identify errors because the audit report represents the auditor’s primary communication with financial statement users and is subject to rigorous preparation and review. We first examine if typical factors influencing audit process ineffectiveness are associated with audit report errors. We then examine whether audit reports containing errors are associated with audit quality measures.FindingsWe find that errors are more likely to be present in audit reports when time pressure exists and less likely when auditors exert more effort and when audit engagement risk is higher. Results also show that errors in audit reports are positively associated with financial reporting misstatements, measured by subsequently disclosed Big R restatements and out-of-period adjustments.Originality/valueCollectively, our evidence suggests that an audit report containing an error is a suitable proxy for audit process ineffectiveness. This proxy has audit quality implications because inattentiveness in one area of the audit process could indicate inattentiveness in another area.","PeriodicalId":45666,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Audit process ineffectiveness: evidence from audit report errors\",\"authors\":\"Brooke D. Beyer, Michelle A. Draeger, Eric T. Rapley\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jal-09-2023-0159\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe process performed during a financial statement audit is critical but is unobservable to external stakeholders. This can create challenges in assessing the quality of individual audit engagements. This study’s objective is to introduce and investigate an archival measure based on publicly available information that proxies for audit process ineffectiveness.Design/methodology/approachWe proxy for audit process ineffectiveness using errors in the audit report. We examine audit reports to identify errors because the audit report represents the auditor’s primary communication with financial statement users and is subject to rigorous preparation and review. We first examine if typical factors influencing audit process ineffectiveness are associated with audit report errors. We then examine whether audit reports containing errors are associated with audit quality measures.FindingsWe find that errors are more likely to be present in audit reports when time pressure exists and less likely when auditors exert more effort and when audit engagement risk is higher. Results also show that errors in audit reports are positively associated with financial reporting misstatements, measured by subsequently disclosed Big R restatements and out-of-period adjustments.Originality/valueCollectively, our evidence suggests that an audit report containing an error is a suitable proxy for audit process ineffectiveness. This proxy has audit quality implications because inattentiveness in one area of the audit process could indicate inattentiveness in another area.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45666,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Accounting Literature\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Accounting Literature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jal-09-2023-0159\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jal-09-2023-0159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 财务报表审计过程至关重要,但外部利益相关者却无法观察到这一过程。这给评估单个审计业务的质量带来了挑战。本研究的目的是引入并调查一种基于公开信息的档案测量方法,以替代审计过程的无效性。我们检查审计报告以识别错误,因为审计报告是审计师与财务报表用户的主要沟通渠道,需要经过严格的准备和审查。我们首先研究影响审计过程无效性的典型因素是否与审计报告中的错误有关。我们发现,在时间压力较大的情况下,审计报告中出现错误的可能性较大;而在审计师付出更多努力和审计业务风险较高的情况下,审计报告中出现错误的可能性较小。结果还显示,审计报告中的错误与财务报告错报呈正相关,以随后披露的 Big R 重述和期外调整来衡量。这种替代方法对审计质量有影响,因为审计过程中一个领域的不专心可能表明另一个领域的不专心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Audit process ineffectiveness: evidence from audit report errors
PurposeThe process performed during a financial statement audit is critical but is unobservable to external stakeholders. This can create challenges in assessing the quality of individual audit engagements. This study’s objective is to introduce and investigate an archival measure based on publicly available information that proxies for audit process ineffectiveness.Design/methodology/approachWe proxy for audit process ineffectiveness using errors in the audit report. We examine audit reports to identify errors because the audit report represents the auditor’s primary communication with financial statement users and is subject to rigorous preparation and review. We first examine if typical factors influencing audit process ineffectiveness are associated with audit report errors. We then examine whether audit reports containing errors are associated with audit quality measures.FindingsWe find that errors are more likely to be present in audit reports when time pressure exists and less likely when auditors exert more effort and when audit engagement risk is higher. Results also show that errors in audit reports are positively associated with financial reporting misstatements, measured by subsequently disclosed Big R restatements and out-of-period adjustments.Originality/valueCollectively, our evidence suggests that an audit report containing an error is a suitable proxy for audit process ineffectiveness. This proxy has audit quality implications because inattentiveness in one area of the audit process could indicate inattentiveness in another area.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: The objective of the Journal is to publish papers that make a fundamental and substantial contribution to the understanding of accounting phenomena. To this end, the Journal intends to publish papers that (1) synthesize an area of research in a concise and rigorous manner to assist academics and others to gain knowledge and appreciation of diverse research areas or (2) present high quality, multi-method, original research on a broad range of topics relevant to accounting, auditing and taxation. Topical coverage is broad and inclusive covering virtually all aspects of accounting. Consistent with the historical mission of the Journal, it is expected that the lead article of each issue will be a synthesis article on an important research topic. Other manuscripts to be included in a given issue will be a mix of synthesis and original research papers. In addition to traditional research topics and methods, we actively solicit manuscripts of the including, but not limited to, the following: • meta-analyses • field studies • critiques of papers published in other journals • emerging developments in accounting theory • commentaries on current issues • innovative experimental research with strong grounding in cognitive, social or anthropological sciences • creative archival analyses using non-standard methodologies or data sources with strong grounding in various social sciences • book reviews • "idea" papers that don''t fit into other established categories.
×
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