MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945524946 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v10n3p132

Evaluation of Audit Expectation Gap in Sudan: Existence, Causes, and Subsequent Effects

2019· article· en· W2945524946 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dina Ahmed Mohamed Ghandour

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditAccountingOriginalityAuditor independenceBusinessQuality auditExternal auditorJoint auditInternal auditActuarial sciencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This study mainly focus on evaluating the existence, causes and subsequent effects of audit expectation gap in Sudan.Proposed Design/Methodology/Approach: A cross sectional research design in which data to be collected through structured questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews. Partial Least Square Path Modeling, using Smart PLS Software to analyze the data.Findings: A detailed literature review reveals that, there is a shortage of research concerning the impact of multi-responsibility auditor, standard external audit process, accounting and auditing regulations in a developing country, auditor independence in fact and in appearance, external audit rotation, and rendering of non-audit services on audit expectation gap.Moreover, there is dearth of studies investigating the moderating role of professional code of ethics, and the mediating effect of audit report .Therefore, the study proposes a framework to incorporate these factors into future research.Practical Implications: The results of this study will assist policy makers in finding ways that can be instituted to tackle expectation gap in Sudan, to improve the quality of the auditing profession in the country.Originality/value: This study contributes to the existing literature by adding evidence to the important debate about audit expectation gap, from a region that had little coverage on the studied matter. Specifically, it proposes a framework to extend the research on the factors that cause such a gap in Sudan. Moreover, a significant feature of this study is in introducing accounting and auditing regulations in a developing country as a new variable to investigate its effects on audit expectation gap.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207