Qualified audit reports in Finland: evidence from large companies

European Accounting Review

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 639-653

  Laitinen, Erkki K ^a   Laitinen, Teija ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VAASA   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011350619     PISSN: 09638180     EISSN: 14684497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/096381898336231     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Altman, E. I., 1968. Financial ratios, discriminant analysis, and the prediction of corporate bankruptcy. Journal of Finance, 4, September: 589–609.
2. Association of Authorized Public Accountants (AAPA or KHT-yhdistys). 1991. The Practice of the Closing of Annual Accounts in Finland - Investigation of 100 large Finnish companies, Vammala, Finland: KHT-yhdistyksen Palvelu Oy. in Finnish
3. Association of Authorized Public Accountants (AAPA or KHT-yhdistys). 1995. Audit Reports and Statements of Auditors, Jyväskylä, Finland: KHTyhdistyksen Palvelu Oy. in Finnish
4. Barnes, P., and Huan, H. D., 1993. The auditor's going concern decision: some UK evidence concerning independence and competence. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 20 (2): 213–228.
5. Bavishi, V. B., ed. 1993. “ Analysis of auditors' reports worldwide ”. In International Accounting and Auditing Trends, Vol. 2, 1–31. Centre for International Financial Analysis & Research.
6. Coopers & Lybrand, ed. 1994. A Guide for Businessmen and Investors, Helsinki, Salmi, Finland: Virkkunen & Helenius Oy.
7. Dopuch, N., Holthausen, R. W., and Leftwich, R. W., 1987. Predicting audit qualifications with financial and market variables. Accounting Review, LXII (3): 431–453.
8. Finnish Committee for Financial Analysis (Yritystutkimusneuvottelukunta). 1990. Financial Statement Analysis in Corporate Analysis, Helsinki: Painokaari Oy.
9. Hopwood, W., McKeow, J., and Mutchler, J., 1989. A test of the incremental explanatory power of opinions qualified for consistency and uncertainty. Accounting Review, LXIV (1): 28–47.
10. Hosmer, D., and Lemeshow, S., 1989. Applied Logistic Regression, New York: John Wiley.
11. Keasey, K., and Watson, R., 1987. Non-financial symptoms and the prediction of small company failure: a test of Argenti's hypotheses. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 14 (3): 335–354.
12. Keasey, K., Watson, R., and Wynarzcyk, P., 1988. The small company audit qualification: a preliminary investigation. Accounting and Business Research, 18 (72): 323–333.
13. Koh, H. C., 1991. Model predictions and auditor assessments of going concern status. Accounting and Business Research, 21 (84): 331–338.
14. Koh, H. C., and Killough, L. N., 1990. The use of multiple discriminant analysis in the assessment of the going concern status of an audit client. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 17 (2): 179–191.
15. Koskela, M., 1990. Auditing in small and middle-sized companies, Working Paper D: 125 Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics. in Finnish
16. Koskela, M., 1993. The public information of auditing in Finland, Working Paper W:59 Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics. in Finnish
17. Lydman, K., 1995. Adjusted audit report. Tilintarkastus-Revision, 35 (5, 6): 347–352. 419–424. in Finnish
18. Prihti, A., 1975. Prediction of failure using financial statement data, Working Paper A: 13 Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics. in Finnish
19. Riistama, V., 1994. “ The theory and practice of auditing ”. In Ekonomia, Jyväskylä, Finland: Weilin & Göös. in Finnish
20. Riistama, V., 1995. “ Auditing. Foundations ”. In Ekonomia, Porvoo, Finland: Weilin & Göös. in Finnish
21. SAS. 1990. “ SAS/STAT ”. In User's Guide. Version 6, 4th edn, Vol. 2, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
22. Sundgren, S., 1997. Can audit reports benefit failure prediction?. Velkakierre Marraskuu, 18 in Finnish
23. Viitanen, J., 1995. Expectation gap–everyday life for auditors also in Finland. Tilintarkastus–Revision, 39 (2): 175–180. in Finnish