1.jpg){kind=logo}
2.png)
1.png)
2.jpg){kind=logo}
AUDITOR DYNAMICS ON AUDIT QUALITY
Abstract
This study conducts a literature review on audit quality over the past few decades from various parts of the world. The main objective of this review is to evaluate the research contributions made in understanding audit quality issues and identify gaps in the literature that require further research. The reviewed studies in this research are grouped into seven different categories to provide a comprehensive framework of understanding. Through this review, existing knowledge on audit quality in the literature will be summarized, and research gaps will be identified. This provides a strong foundation for further research that can deepen our understanding of the factors influencing audit quality and their related consequences.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Baotham, S. (2004). Audit independence, quality, and credibility: Effects on reputation and sustainable success of CPAs in Thailand. International Journal of Business Research, 1.
Carey, P., & Simnett, R. (2006). Audit partner tenure and audit quality. The Accounting Review, 81(3), 563-676.
Carcello, J. V., Hermanson, R. H., & McGrath, N. T. (1992). Audit Quality Attributes: The Perceptions of Audit Partners, Preparers, and Financial Statement Users. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 11(1), 1-15.
Clarkson, P. M., & Simunic, D. A. (1994). The association between audit quality, retained ownership, and firm-specific risk in U.S. vs. Canadian IPO markets. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 17, 207-228.
Choi, J. H., Kim, J. B., & Zang, Y. (2010). Audit Office Size, Audit Quality and Audit Pricing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 22(1), 73-97.
Dang, L. (2004). Assessing Actual Audit Quality (Doctoral dissertation). Drexel University.
DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor Size and Audit Quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183-199.
Duff, A. (2004). Audit quality: Dimensions of Audit Quality. Edinburgh: The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.
Ettredge, M., Heintz, J., Li, C., & Scholz, S. (2008). Auditor realignments accompanying implementation of SOX 404 reporting requirements (Working paper). University of Kansas.
Francis, J., & Wang, D. (2004). Investor protection and auditor conservatism: Are Big 4 auditors conservative only in the United States? (Working Paper). University of Missouri and University of Nebraska.
Geiger, M. A., & Rama, D. V. (2006). Audit firm size and going-concern reporting accuracy. Accounting Horizons, 20(1), 1-17.
Geiger, M., & Raghunandan, K. (2002). Auditor tenure and audit reporting failures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 21(1), 67–78.
Ghosh, A., & Moon, D. (2005). Auditor Tenure and Perceptions of Audit Quality. The Accounting Review, 80(2), 585-612.
Krishnan, J., & Schauer, P. C. (2000). The Differentiation of Quality among Auditors: Evidence from the Not-for-Profit Sector. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 19(2), 9-26.
Lennox, G. S. (1999). Audit Quality and Auditor Size: An Evaluation of Reputation and Deep Pockets Hypotheses. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 26(7/8), 779-805.
Malone, C.F., & Roberts, R.W. (1996). Factors associated with the incidence of reduced audit quality behaviours. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 15(2), 49-64.
Palmrose, Z. (1988). An Analysis of Auditor Litigation and Audit Service Quality. The Accounting Review, 64(1)
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31000/dmj.v7i3.8897
Article Metrics
Abstract - 360 PDF - 642Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Jurnal ini telah terindeks dalam:
Office:
Editor of Dynamic Management Journal (DMJ) UMT, Building F, 3rd Floor, Department Management Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitiy Of Muhammadiyah Tangerang
Jl. Perintis Kemerdekaan I No.33, RT.007/RW.003, Babakan, Cikokol, Kec. Tangerang, Kota Tangerang, Banten 15118
Wa: 08567312111 (Galuh), 085716034977 (Eky)
Email: dynamic@gmail.com
Dynamic management journal is licensed under Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
