MétaCan
← all works

Understanding Audit Quality: Insights from Audit Professionals and Investors

2015· article· en· 413 citations· W3122057730 on OpenAlex· 10.1111/1911-3846.12212

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian venueIt was published in a Canadian venue.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Machine scores (provisional)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.252
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread
0.105 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Abstract Projects seeking to define, measure, and evaluate audit quality are on the agendas of auditing standards setters as well as audit firms. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board ( PCAOB ) currently provides information regarding audit quality through the release of inspection reports, and the Board intends to establish and report audit quality indicators. To provide additional perspective on audit quality, we obtain auditors' and investors' views, definitions, and indicators of audit quality. We find that investors' definitions of audit quality focus more on inputs to the audit process than do auditors', and that investors view the number of PCAOB deficiencies as an indicator of overall firm quality. We find a consensus that auditor characteristics may be the most important determinants of audit quality, and that restatements may be the most readily available signal of low audit quality. We relate responses to a general audit quality framework, provide support for archival audit research, and identify additional disclosures that participants suggest could signal audit quality. Taken together, we provide evidence regarding the construct of audit quality in the post‐ SOX environment, evaluate many of the audit quality indicators proposed by the PCAOB , and suggest avenues for future research.

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.

The record

Venue
Contemporary Accounting Research
Topic
Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Field
Business, Management and Accounting
Canadian institutions
Funders
University of Nebraska-LincolnDeloitte Foundation
Keywords
AuditAccountingQuality auditAudit evidenceBusinessJoint auditAudit planInformation technology auditChief audit executiveQuality (philosophy)Internal audit
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes