AS 4审计期望与现实的不匹配:实施后的研究分析

Sanaz Aghazadeh, Marietta Peytcheva
{"title":"AS 4审计期望与现实的不匹配:实施后的研究分析","authors":"Sanaz Aghazadeh, Marietta Peytcheva","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2987919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We conduct a post-implementation research analysis of AS4, a standard guiding voluntary audits of material weakness (MW) remediation disclosures, to understand the reasons for the scarcity of AS4 audits in practice. We use multiple methods (experiments, comment letter analysis, and surveys) to understand the perspectives of key stakeholders. We find that regulators’ expectations of the use of the standard did not come to fruition because an equilibrium market for active use of the standard could not be achieved. Managers desire to engage in AS4 audits for the riskier MWs but do not expect the associated costs to be high. Auditors are reluctant to audit riskier MWs, and would charge a considerable risk premium. Finally, we find that investors value AS4 audits especially for riskier MWs and find value in an AS4 audit for those risky MWs beyond that of the year-end audit. The overall findings of our study indicate a mismatch in the cost-benefit functions of the key stakeholders led to a lack of AS4 audits. Our findings are important given the high costs associated with standard development and approval.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Mismatch between Expectations and Realities of AS 4 Audits: A Post-Implementation Research Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Sanaz Aghazadeh, Marietta Peytcheva\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2987919\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We conduct a post-implementation research analysis of AS4, a standard guiding voluntary audits of material weakness (MW) remediation disclosures, to understand the reasons for the scarcity of AS4 audits in practice. We use multiple methods (experiments, comment letter analysis, and surveys) to understand the perspectives of key stakeholders. We find that regulators’ expectations of the use of the standard did not come to fruition because an equilibrium market for active use of the standard could not be achieved. Managers desire to engage in AS4 audits for the riskier MWs but do not expect the associated costs to be high. Auditors are reluctant to audit riskier MWs, and would charge a considerable risk premium. Finally, we find that investors value AS4 audits especially for riskier MWs and find value in an AS4 audit for those risky MWs beyond that of the year-end audit. The overall findings of our study indicate a mismatch in the cost-benefit functions of the key stakeholders led to a lack of AS4 audits. Our findings are important given the high costs associated with standard development and approval.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2987919\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2987919","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们对指导对重大缺陷(MW)补救披露进行自愿审计的标准AS4进行了实施后研究分析,以了解在实践中缺乏AS4审计的原因。我们使用多种方法(实验、评论信分析和调查)来了解关键利益相关者的观点。我们发现,监管机构对标准使用的期望并没有实现,因为积极使用标准的均衡市场无法实现。管理人员希望对风险较高的MWs进行AS4审计,但不希望相关成本很高。审计人员不愿审计风险较高的MWs,因为这会收取相当大的风险溢价。最后,我们发现投资者特别重视风险较高的MWs的AS4审计,并且发现对那些风险较高的MWs进行AS4审计的价值超出了年终审计的价值。我们研究的总体结果表明,关键利益相关者的成本效益功能的不匹配导致了AS4审计的缺乏。考虑到与标准开发和批准相关的高成本,我们的发现很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Mismatch between Expectations and Realities of AS 4 Audits: A Post-Implementation Research Analysis
We conduct a post-implementation research analysis of AS4, a standard guiding voluntary audits of material weakness (MW) remediation disclosures, to understand the reasons for the scarcity of AS4 audits in practice. We use multiple methods (experiments, comment letter analysis, and surveys) to understand the perspectives of key stakeholders. We find that regulators’ expectations of the use of the standard did not come to fruition because an equilibrium market for active use of the standard could not be achieved. Managers desire to engage in AS4 audits for the riskier MWs but do not expect the associated costs to be high. Auditors are reluctant to audit riskier MWs, and would charge a considerable risk premium. Finally, we find that investors value AS4 audits especially for riskier MWs and find value in an AS4 audit for those risky MWs beyond that of the year-end audit. The overall findings of our study indicate a mismatch in the cost-benefit functions of the key stakeholders led to a lack of AS4 audits. Our findings are important given the high costs associated with standard development and approval.
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
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