دانلود رایگان مقاله بررسی اندازه موسسه حسابرسی

عنوان فارسی
آیا اندازه حسابرس مهم است؟ شواهدی از موسسات حسابرسی کوچک
عنوان انگلیسی
Does auditor size matter? Evidence from small audit firms
صفحات مقاله فارسی
0
صفحات مقاله انگلیسی
10
سال انتشار
2015
نشریه
الزویر - Elsevier
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی
PDF
کد محصول
E2006
رشته های مرتبط با این مقاله
مدیریت، علوم اقتصادی و حسابداری
گرایش های مرتبط با این مقاله
حسابرسی، حسابداری مدیریت، مدیریت کسب و کارف مدیریت عملکرد، اقتصاد پولی
مجله
ترکیب پیشرفت در حسابداری بین المللی
دانشگاه
دانشکده مدیریت ویتمن ، دانشگاه سیراکیوز، نیویورک، ایالات متحده
کلمات کلیدی
موسسات حسابرسی کوچک، مدیریت سود، مدیریت سود واقعی
۰.۰ (بدون امتیاز)
امتیاز دهید
چکیده

abstract


While prior literature documents that Big 4 auditors provide higher quality audits, recent evidence suggests that these differences are due to client characteristics (Lawrence, Minutti-Meza, & Zang, 2011). Evidence on the audit quality of mid-tier auditors is mixed (Boone, Khurana, & Raman, 2010; Cassell, Giroux, Myers, & Omer, 2013). This study investigates the audit quality of small auditor firms (i.e., those with 100 or fewer). Specifically, we examine the relationship between earnings manipulations and the use of small audit firms, controlling for client characteristics using propensity score matching. We find that small audit firms are less able to constrain managers' opportunistic use of discretionary accruals. However we find no evidence that small audit firms are associated with real activity manipulation. By investigating a specific group of audit firms that are the smallest in the audit market, this study extends our understanding of the role of audit firm size in audit quality.

نتیجه گیری

5. Conclusion


Smaller audit firms have attracted limited attention both in practice and in academic research since PCAOB inspections were implemented. This paper investigates the role of small audit firms on earnings management. Specifically, this paper examines what types of clients choose small audit firms, and whether small audit firms have less ability to constrain managers' opportunistic behavior. We find that the choice of small audit firms is associated with a higher level of earnings manipulation, when measured by accruals management. However, we find no evidence that the use of small audit firms is associated with a higher level of real activity manipulations. DeAngelo (1981) argues that larger audit firms have “more to lose” if they fail to report a breach. Since DeAngelo (1981) provides theoretical support for audit firm size as a proxy for auditor quality, a large body of research uses larger audit firm size as a surrogate for better audit quality (e.g., Becker et al., 1998; Francis & Krishnan, 1999; Francis et al., 1999; Lennox & Pittman, 2010; Teoh & Wong, 1993; Weber & Willenborg, 2003). Nonetheless, some recent studies show that there is no actual difference in audit quality between Big 4 auditors and non-Big 4 auditors. Specifically, Lawrence et al. (2011) show that the differences in proxies for audit quality between Big 4 and non-Big 4 auditors are more likely attributable to client characteristics.


بدون دیدگاه