MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W16297237 · doi:10.1186/1746-1448-1-10

Factors Affecting Auditor Change Decision in Yemen: A Survey

2010· dissertation· en· W16297237 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adel Ali Al‐Qadasi

Bibliographic record

VenueSaline Systems · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditBusinessAccountingPerceptionQuality auditQuality (philosophy)Auditor independenceExternal auditorPrincipal (computer security)Joint auditPsychologyInternal audit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Auditor changes are alarmingly high in Yemen and have been rising of late and the driving factors in this regard could be particular to Yemen. This study examines the motivations for public firms in Yemen to change auditors. In this paper, a questionnaire instrument is used to elicit perceptions of behavioral, economic or other factors that influence auditor-client realignments in Yemen. The study concludes primarily that economic factors provide the principal motivators of auditor changes in Yemen. Behavioral forces albeit influential factors of auditor change, come only secondary in importance. Dissatisfaction with audit quality, use of inexperienced audit engagement staff feature and poor working relationships with audit partner/staff feature as foremost concerns. Underlying this, there is evidence of significant associations between the reasons for change and type of change. Also, there is a significant relationship between the auditor change and size of companies. In particular, larger and medium companies, and companies changing from a non-Big Four to Big Four firm, were more likely to change due to dissatisfaction with audit quality, and the need for a wider range of services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSaline SystemsSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207