An Analysis of Auditor Litigation and Audit Service Quality
An Analysis of Auditor Litigation and Audit Service Quality
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Zoe-Vonna Palmrose
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zoe-Vonna Palmrose
本研究比较了独立审计师的诉讼活动，以评估诉讼作为一种手段，使审计师之间的质量区分。该研究提供了一个框架，表明诉讼活动相对较低（较高）的审计师代表较高（较低）质量的供应商。实证分析考察了法律案件样本（n = 472）和这些案件的解决方案（如果有的话，n= 183）。这些案件涉及1960年至1985年间针对八大会计师事务所和非八大会计师事务所的审计相关诉讼。结果表明，作为一个整体，非八大律所的诉讼活动高于八大律所。这一结果与支持八大会计师事务所作为质量差异化审计机构的现有研究相一致。八大公司之间的比较揭示了一些显著的差异。然而，将八大会计师事务所确定为低（高）诉讼活动审计师似乎对分析类型很敏感。his的研究比较了美国最大的独立审计公司的诉讼活动。针对审计人员的诉讼通常涉及一个过程，从最初发现可能存在虚假或误导性的财务报表，到提起诉讼，再到最终解决此类诉讼。在调查审计师之间的诉讼差异时，该研究利用了诉讼发生和解决方案的数据。比较的主要目的是评估诉讼作为在独立审计公司之间进行质量区分的手段。之前对审计师诉讼的实证研究（Kellogg [1984]; Palmrose [1987]; and St. Pierre and Anderson[1984]）1和审计质量的实证研究(Francis and Simon [1987]; Nichols and Smith [1983]； Palmrose对加州大学伯克利分校专业会计项目的财务援助以及Hay Young Chung、Changyong Ham和Richard Taylor的研究援助表示感谢。我要感谢Mike Duffy和Robert Kellogg在数据收集过程中的贡献。此外，我要感谢许多个人和团体提供的有益意见，包括小威廉·l·菲利克斯、玛西娅·奈尔斯、肯特·圣·皮埃尔、华盛顿大学和亚利桑那大学研讨会的参与者，尤其是小威廉·r·金尼。ZoeVonna Palmrose是加州大学伯克利分校工商管理学院的助理教授。1987年2月收稿。1987年7月收到订正。1987年8月接受。*编者注：《税收与表外融资：研究与发展有限合伙》，作者特里·舍夫林，1987年7月刊
This study compares litigation activities of independent auditors to assess litigation as a means for making quality distinctions among auditors. The study provides a framework suggesting auditors with relatively low (high) litigation activity represent higher (lower) quality suppliers. The empirical analysis examines a sample of legal cases (n = 472) and resolutions for these cases (if available, n= 183). The cases involve audit-related litigation against both Big Eight and large non-Big Eight firms during 1960-1985. The results indicate that nonBig Eight firms as a group have higher litigation activity than Big Eight firms. This result is consistent with existing research supporting the Big Eight as quality-differentiated auditors. Comparisons among Big Eight firms reveal some significant differences. However, identification of particular Big Eight firms as low (high) litigation activity auditors appears sensitive to the type of analysis. T HISstudy compares litigation activities among the largest U.S. independent audit firms. Litigation against auditors typically involves a process, from initial discovery of potentially false or misleading financial statements, to filing of lawsuits, and eventual resolution of such suits. In investigating differences in litigation among auditors, the study utilizes data on both litigation occurrences and resolutions. The primary objective of the comparisons is to assess litigation as a means for making quality distinctions among independent audit firms. Previous empirical research on auditor litigation (Kellogg [1984]; Palmrose [1987]; and St. Pierre and Anderson [1984])1 and on audit quality (Francis and Simon [1987]; Nichols and Smith [1983]; Palmrose Financial assistance of the University of California at Berkeley Professional Accounting Program and the research assistance of Hay Young Chung, Changyong Ham, and Richard Taylor are gratefully acknowledged. I would like to thank Mike Duffy and Robert Kellogg for contributions during the data-gathering process. In addition, I would like to acknowledge the helpful comments of various individuals and groups including, William L. Felix, Jr., Marcia Niles, Kent St. Pierre, participants in workshops at the University of Washington and the University of Arizona, and especially William R. Kinney, Jr. ZoeVonna Palmrose is Assistant Professor at the School of Business Administration, University of California at Berkeley. Manuscript received February 1987. Revision received July 1987. Accepted August 1987. *Editor's Note: "Taxes and Off-Balance-Sheet Financing: Research and Development Limited Partnerships" by Terry Shevlin that appeared in the July 1987 issue of