Does investor selection of auditors enhance auditor independence?

Accounting Review

Volumn 79, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 797-822

  Mayhew, Brian W ^a   Pike, Joel E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditor independence; Auditor objectivity; Experimental economics; Investor selection

Indexed keywords

EID: 3943078522     PISSN: 00014826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/accr.2004.79.3.797     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Abdel-khalik, A. R. 2002. Reforming corporate governance post Enron: Shareholders' board of trustees and the auditor. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 21 (1): 97-103.
2. Advisory Panel on Auditor Independence. 1994. Strengthening the Professionalism of the Independent Auditor: Report to the Public Oversight Board of the SEC Practice Section, AICPA, from the Advisory Panel on Auditor Independence. Stamford, CT: Public Oversight Board.
3. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), Commission on Auditors' Responsibility (Cohen Commission). 1978. Report, Conclusions, and Recommendations. New York: NY AICPA.
4. _, Public Oversight Board. 1993. In the Public Interest: A Special Report by the Public Oversight Board of the SEC Practice Section, AICPA: Issues Confronting the Accounting Profession: Litigation, Self-Regulation, Standards, Public Confidence, Professional Practice. New York, NY: AICPA.
5. _. 1997. AICPA Professional Standards. Volume I. New York: NY AICPA.
6. Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees. 1999. Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees. New York, NY: NYSE/NASD.
7. Calegari, M., J. Schatzberg, and G. Sevcik. 1998. Experimental evidence of differential auditor pricing and reporting strategies. The Accounting Review 73 (April): 255-275.
8. Cony, E. 1961. CPA invasion. Wall Street Journal (October 30): 1.
9. DeAngelo, L. 1981a. Auditor independence, "low balling," and disclosure regulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics (August): 113-127.
10. _. 1981b. Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics (December): 183-200.
11. Deener, B. 2002. Auditors often victims of "kill the messenger" mentality: Many firms get the boot after delivering bad financial news. Dallas Morning News (March 7).
12. DeJong, D. V., R. Forsythe, and R. J. Lundholm. 1985. Ripoffs, lemons, and reputation formation in agency relationships: A laboratory market study. Journal of Finance 40 (3): 809-820.
13. Dopuch, N., R. King, and D. Wallin. 1989. The use of experimental markets in auditing research: Some initial findings. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 8 (Supplement): 98-127.
14. _, _, and R. Schwartz. 2001. Independence in appearance and in fact: An experimental investigation. Working paper, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
15. Dye, R. A. 1991. Informationally motivated auditor replacement. Journal of Accounting and Economics 14: 347-374.
16. Ellsburg, D. 1961. Risk, ambiguity and the savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics 75: 643-669.
17. Griswold, E. N. 1955. The tax practice problem 1: A further look at lawyers and accountants. The Journal of Accountancy 100 (6): 29-35.
18. Hackenbrack, K., and M. W. Nelson. 1996. Auditors' incentives and their application of financial accounting standards. The Accounting Review 71 (January): 43-59.
19. Hilzenrath, D. S. 2001. After Enron, new doubts about auditors. The Washington Post (December 5): A1.
20. King, R. 1996. Reputation formation for reliable reporting: An experimental investigation. The Accounting Review 71 (3): 375-396.
21. Lee, C-W. J., and Z. Gu. 1998. Low balling, legal liability, and auditor independence. The Accounting Review 73 (October): 533-555.
22. Lev, B. 2002. Too gray for its own good. Wall Street Journal (January 22): A20.
23. Levitt, A. 1998. The numbers game. Speech delivered at New York University Center for Law and Business, September 28.
24. _. 2000. Renewing the covenant with investors. Speech delivered at New York University Center for Law and Business, May 10.
25. Magee, R. P., and M. Tseng. 1990. Audit pricing and independence. The Accounting Review 65 (April): 315-336.
26. Mautz, R. K., and H. A. Sharaf. 1961. The Philosophy of Auditing. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
27. Mayhew, B. W. 2001. Auditor reputation building. Journal of Accounting Research 39 (December): 599-617.
28. _, J. W. Schatzberg, and G. R. Sevcik. 2001. The effect of accounting uncertainty and auditor reputation on auditor objectivity. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 20 (September): 49-70.
29. McNamee, M. 2002. Turn up the heat on board cronyism, Mr. Grasso. BusinessWeek (April 22): 36-37.
30. O'Connor, S. M. 2002. The inevitability of Enron and the impossibility of "auditor independence" under the current audit system. Working paper, University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
31. Panel on Audit Effectiveness. 2000. Report and Recommendations. Stamford, CT: Public Oversight Board.
32. Previts, G. J. 1998. Auditor independence: A perspective on its origins and orientations. Research in Accounting Regulation 12: 299-317.
33. Salterio, S., and L. Koonce. 1997. The persuasiveness of audit evidence: The case of accounting policy decisions. Accounting, Organizations and Society 6: 573-587.
34. Saul, R. S. 1996. Commentary: What ails the accounting profession? Accounting Horizons 10 (2): 131-137.
35. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2000. Revision of the Commissioner's Auditor Independence Requirements. File no: S7-13-00, effective date February 5, 2001. Other Release Nos.: 34-43602; 35-27279; IC-24744; IA-1911; FR-56. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/final /33-7919.htm.
36. Schatzberg, J. W., and G. Sevcik. 1994. A multi-period model and experimental evidence of independence and "lowballing." Contemporary Accounting Research 11 (Summer): 137-174.
37. Schuetze, W. P. 1994. Commentary: A mountain or a molehill? Accounting Horizons 8 (1): 69-75.
38. Schulte, A. A. Jr., F. J. Hoenemeyer, and M. M. Devore. 1967. Compatibility of auditing and management services. The Journal of Accountancy 124 (6): 29-39.
39. Stans, M. H. 1955. The tax practice problem 2: A proposed solution to the controversy. The Journal of Accountancy 100 (6): 36-43.
40. Swieringa, R. J., and K. E. Weick. 1982. An assessment of laboratory experiments in accounting. Journal of Accounting Research 20 (Supplement): 56-101.
41. Turley, J. S. 2002. Commentary: How accounting can get back its good name. Wall Street Journal (February 4).
42. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. 1985. SEC and Corporate Audits: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations and the Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
43. _. 2002. The Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility and Transparency Act of 2002. H.R. 3763. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
44. U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Reports, Accounting and Management of the Committee on Government Operations (Metcalf Committee). 1977. The Accounting Establishment: A Staff Study. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
45. _. 2002a. Auditor Independence Act of 2002. S. 1896. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
46. _, 2002b. Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002. S. 2763. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
47. United States v. Arthur Young & Co. 465 U.S. 805, 817-818 (1984).
48. Wallman, S. M. H. 1996. Commentary: The future of accounting, Part III: Reliability and auditor independence. Accounting Horizons 10 (4): 76-97.