Independence threats, litigation risk, and the auditor's decision process;Les menaces pour l'indépendance, le risque de litiges et le processus décisionnel du vérificateur

Contemporary Accounting Research

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 759-789

  Blay, Allen D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditor independence; Auditor reporting; Decision process; Going concern; Motivated reasoning

Indexed keywords

EID: 29844451033     PISSN: 08239150     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1506/5FQ9-ANEA-T8J0-U6GY     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1988. Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 59: The auditor's consideration of an entity's ability to continue as a going concern. New York: AICPA.
2. Ashbaugh, H., R. LaFond, and B. W. Mayhew. 2003. Do nonaudit services compromise auditor independence? Further evidence. The Accounting Review 78 (3): 611-39.
3. Bamber, E. M. 1983. Expert judgment in the audit team: A source reliability approach. Journal of Accounting Research 21 (2): 396-412.
4. Bamber, E. M., R. J. Ramsey, and R. M. Tubbs. 1997. An examination of the descriptive validity of the belief-adjustment model and alternative attitudes to evidence in auditing. Accounting, Organizations and Society 22 (3): 249-68.
5. Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (6): 1173-82.
6. Beckmann, J., and P. M. Gollwitzer. 1987. Deliberative versus implemental states of mind: The issue of impartiality in predecisional and postdecisional information processing. Social Cognition 5 (3): 258-79.
7. Blacconiere, W. G., and M. L. DeFond. 1997. An investigation of independent audit opinions and subsequent independent auditor litigation of publicly-traded failed savings and loans. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 16 (4): 415-54.
8. Boiney, L. G., J. Kennedy, and P. Nye. 1997. Instrumental bias in motivated reasoning: More when more is needed. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 72 (1): 1-24.
9. Carcello, J. V., and Z. Palmrose. 1994. Auditor litigation and modified reporting on bankrupt clients. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (Supplement): 1-29.
10. Chang, C. J., and N.-C. R. Hwang. 2003. The impact of retention incentives and client business risks on auditors' decisions involving aggressive reporting practices. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 22 (2): 207-18.
11. Chow, C. W., and S. J. Rice. 1982. Qualified audit opinions and auditor switching. The Accounting Review 57 (2): 326-35.
12. Chung, H., and S. Kallapur. 2003. Client importance, non-audit services, and abnormal accruals. The Accounting Review 78 (4): 931-55.
13. Davis, E. B., and R. H. Ashton. 2002. Threshold adjustment in response to asymmetric loss functions: The case of auditor's "substantial doubt" thresholds. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 89 (2): 1082-99.
14. Davis, L. R., and D. T. Simon. 1992. The impact of SEC disciplinary actions on audit fees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 11 (1): 58-68.
15. DeAngelo, L. 1981. Auditor independence, "low balling", and disclosure regulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics 3 (2): 113-27.
16. DeFond, M. L., K. Raghunandan, and K. R. Subramanyam. 2002. Do non-audit service fees impair auditor independence? Evidence from going concern audit opinions. Journal of Accounting Research 40 (4): 1247-72.
17. Ditto, P. H., and D. F. Lopez. 1992. Motivated skepticism: Use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63 (4): 568-84.
18. Etheridge, H. L., R. S. Sriram, and H. Y. K. Hsu. 2000. A comparison of selected artificial neural networks that help auditors evaluate client financial viability. Decision Sciences 31 (2): 531-50.
19. Fischhoff, B. 1982. For those condemned to study the past: Heuristics and biases in hindsight. In Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, eds. D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, and A. Tversky. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20. Ferguson, M. J., G. S. Seow, and D. Young. 2004. Nonaudit services and earnings management: UK evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research 21 (4): 813-41.
21. Frankel, R., M. Johnson, and K. Nelson. 2002. The relation between auditors' fees for nonaudit services and earnings management. The Accounting Review 77 (Supplement): 71-105.
22. Geiger, M. A., and K. Raghunandan. 2001. Bankruptcies, audit reports, and the Reform Act. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 20 (March): 187-95.
23. Geiger, M. A., K. Raghunandan, and D. V. Rama. 1998. Costs associated with going-concern modified audit opinions: An analysis of auditor changes, subsequent opinions, and client failures. Advances in Accounting 16: 117-39.
24. Geiger, M. A. and D. V. Rama. 2003. Audit fees, nonaudit fees, and auditor reporting on stressed clients. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 22 (2): 53-69.
25. Hackenbrack, K., and M. W. Nelson. 1996. Auditors' incentives and their application of financial accounting standards. The Accounting Review 71 (1): 43-59.
26. Hirst, D. E. 1994. Auditors' sensitivity to source reliability. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (1): 113-26.
27. Hoffman, V. B., J. R. Joe, and D. V. Moser. 2003. The effect of constrained processing on auditors' judgments. Accounting, Organizations and Society 28 (7): 699-714.
28. Hopwood, W., J. McKeown, and J. Mutchler. 1994. A reexamination of auditor versus model accuracy within the context of the going-concern opinion decision. Contemporary Accounting Research 10 (1): 409-31.
29. Jain, S. P. 2003. Preference consistency and preference strength: Processing and judgmental issues. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 33 (5): 1088-109.
30. Johnstone, K. M., M. H. Sutton, and T. D. Warfield. 2001. Antecedents and consequences of independence risk: Framework for analysis. Accounting Horizons 15 (1): 1-18.
31. Kadous, K., S. J. Kennedy, and M. E. Peecher. 2003. The effect of quality assessment and directional goal commitment on auditors' acceptance of client-preferred accounting methods. The Accounting Review 78 (3): 759-78.
32. Kennedy, J. 1993. Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research 31 (2): 231-45.
33. Klayman, J., and Y. Ha. 1987. Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review 94 (2): 211-28.
34. Knechel, W. R., and W. F. Messier Jr. 1990. Sequential auditor decision making: Information search and evidence evaluation. Contemporary Accounting Research 6 (2): 386-406.
35. KPMG. 2004. Oversight of auditors - Audit committee roundtable highlights - Spring 2004. KPMG Audit Committee Institute.
36. Kruglanski, A. W., and Y. Klar. 1987. A view from the bridge: Synthesizing the consistency and attribution paradigms from a lay epistemic perspective. European Journal of Social Psychology 17 (2): 211-41.
37. Kunda, Z. 1990. The case for motivated reasoning. Pychological Bulletin 108 (3): 480-98.
38. Kunda, Z. 1999. Social cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Larcker, D. F., and S. A. Richardson. 2003. Corporate governance, fees for non-audit services, and accrual choices. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania.
40. Larrick, R. P., R. E. Nisbett, and J. N. Morgan. 1993. Who uses the cost-benefit rules of choice? Implications for the normative status of microeconomic theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 56 (3): 331-47.
41. LaSalle, R. E., and A. Anandarajan. 1996. Auditors views on the type of audit report issued to entities with going concern uncertainties. Journal of Accounting Literature 10: 51-72.
42. Lundgren, S. R., and R. Prislin. 1998. Motivated cognitive processing and attitude change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24 (7): 715-26.
43. Lys, T., and R. L. Watts. 1994. Lawsuits against auditors. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (Supplement): 65-93.
44. Magee, R., and M. Tseng. 1990. Audit pricing and independence. The Accounting Review 65 (2): 315-36.
45. Mutchler, J. 1983. A multivariate analysis of auditor decision making in the presence of going-concern uncertainties. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois.
46. Mutchler, J., W. S. Hopwood, and J. M. McKeown. 1997. The influence of contrary information and mitigating factors on audit opinion decisions on bankrupt companies. Journal of Accounting Research 35 (2): 295-310.
47. Neuberg, S. L., and S. T. Fiske. 1987. Motivational influences on impression formulation: Dependency, accuracy-driven attention, and individuating information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53 (3): 431-44.
48. Palmrose, Z.-V. 1988. An analysis of auditor litigation and audit service quality. The Accounting Review 63 (1): 55-73.
49. Pratt, J., and J. D. Stice. 1994. The effects of client characteristics on auditor litigation risk judgments, required audit evidence, and recommended audit fees. The Accounting Review 69 (4): 639-56.
50. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. 1995. HR 1058.
51. Public Companies Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2004a. Auditing Standard No. 3: Audit documentation. PCAOB.
52. Public Companies Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2004b. Release No. 2004-015: Proposed ethics and independence rules concerning independence, tax services, and contingent fees. PCAOB.
53. Pyszczynski, T., and J. Greenberg. 1987. Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis testing model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 20: 297-340.
54. Russo, J. E., V. H. Medvec, and M. G. Meloy. 1996. The distortion of information during decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66 (1): 102-10.
55. Russo, J. E., V. H. Medvec, and M. G. Meloy. 1998. Predecisional distortion of product information. Journal of Marketing Research 35 (3): 438-52.
56. Russo, J. E., M. G. Meloy, and T. J. Wilks. 2000. Predecisional distortion of information by auditors and salespersons. Management Science 46 (1): 13-27.
57. St. Pierre, K., and J. Anderson. 1984. An analysis of the factors associated with lawsuits against public accountants. The Accounting Review 58 (2): 242-63.
58. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. 2002. Pub. L. no. 107-204.
59. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2000. Final rule: Revision of the commission's auditor independence requirements.
60. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2002. SEC proposes auditor independence and workpaper retention rules required under Sarbanes-Oxley, agrees to issue report on anti-money laundering rules. Release no. 2002-165.
61. Slice, J. D. 1991. Using financial and market information to identify pre-engagement factors associated with lawsuits against auditors. The Accounting Review 66 (3): 516-33.
62. Wallman, S. M. H. 1996. The future of accounting, part III: Reliability and auditor independence. Accounting Horizons 9 (4): 76-97.
63. Zhang, P. 1999. A bargaining model of audit reporting. Contemporary Accounting Research 16 (1): 167-84.