IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v212y2022ics016517652200012x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do over-conservative going concern audit opinions exist? Evidence from the prediction model approach

Author

Listed:
  • Yu, Chun-Chan
  • Huang, Hua-Wei
  • Yang, Ya-Chih
  • Xie, Anxuan

Abstract

We exploratively use the prediction model approach to investigate whether over-conservative going concern audit opinions (GCAOs) exist. Using data from US public firms during 2004–2015, we do not find statistical evidence supporting the existence of over-conservative GCAOs.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu, Chun-Chan & Huang, Hua-Wei & Yang, Ya-Chih & Xie, Anxuan, 2022. "Do over-conservative going concern audit opinions exist? Evidence from the prediction model approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:212:y:2022:i:c:s016517652200012x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2022.110292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016517652200012X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2022.110292?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chan Li, 2009. "Does Client Importance Affect Auditor Independence at the Office Level? Empirical Evidence from Going†Concern Opinions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 201-230, March.
    2. Fung, Simon Yu Kit & Raman, K.K. & Zhu, Xindong (Kevin), 2017. "Does the PCAOB international inspection program improve audit quality for non-US-listed foreign clients?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 15-36.
    3. Kim, Irene & Skinner, Douglas J., 2012. "Measuring securities litigation risk," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 290-310.
    4. Ed Dehaan & Joshua Madsen & Joseph D. Piotroski, 2017. "Do Weather‐Induced Moods Affect the Processing of Earnings News?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 509-550, June.
    5. Peter J. Carey & Marshall A. Geiger & Brendan T. O’Connell, 2008. "Costs Associated With Going‐Concern‐Modified Audit Opinions: An Analysis of the Australian Audit Market," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 44(1), pages 61-81, March.
    6. Ge, Weili & Koester, Allison & McVay, Sarah, 2017. "Benefits and costs of Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404(b) exemption: Evidence from small firms’ internal control disclosures," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 358-384.
    7. Patricia M. Dechow & Weili Ge & Chad R. Larson & Richard G. Sloan, 2011. "Predicting Material Accounting Misstatements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 17-82, March.
    8. W. Robert Knechel & Ann Vanstraelen & Mikko Zerni, 2015. "Does the Identity of Engagement Partners Matter? An Analysis of Audit Partner Reporting Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 1443-1478, December.
    9. Mark L. Defond & Jere R. Francis & Nicholas J. Hallman, 2018. "Awareness of SEC Enforcement and Auditor Reporting Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 277-313, March.
    10. Blacconiere, Walter G. & DeFond, Mark L., 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, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 415-454.
    11. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Guangming Gong & Liang Xiao & Si Xu & Xun Gong, 2019. "Do Bond Investors Care About Engagement Auditors’ Negative Experiences? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 779-806, September.
    3. Feng Guo & Chenxi Lin & Adi Masli & Michael S. Wilkins, 2021. "Auditor Responses to Shareholder Activism," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 63-95, March.
    4. Christensen, Brant & Schmardebeck, Roy & Seidel, Timothy, 2022. "Do auditors’ incentives affect materiality assessments of prior-period misstatements?," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    5. Jie Hao & Viet Pham & Meng Guo, 2022. "The Gender Effects of Audit Partners on Audit Outcomes: Evidence of Rule 3211 Adoption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(2), pages 275-304, May.
    6. Shivaram Rajgopal & Suraj Srinivasan & Xin Zheng, 2021. "Measuring audit quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 559-619, June.
    7. Dan Dacian Cuzdriorean, 2018. "Auditing Research: A Review Of Recent Research Advances," Eurasian Journal of Economics and Finance, Eurasian Publications, vol. 6(4), pages 14-26.
    8. Bills, Kenneth L. & Cobabe, Matthew & Pittman, Jeffrey & Stein, Sarah E., 2020. "To share or not to share: The importance of peer firm similarity to auditor choice," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    9. Inder K. Khurana & Nathan G. Lundstrom & K. K. Raman, 2021. "PCAOB Inspections and the Differential Audit Quality Effect for Big 4 and Non–Big 4 US Auditors," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 376-411, March.
    10. Zvi Singer & Jing Zhang, 2022. "Do companies try to conceal financial misstatements through auditor shopping?," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1-2), pages 140-180, January.
    11. Badolato, Patrick G. & Donelson, Dain C. & Ege, Matthew, 2014. "Audit committee financial expertise and earnings management: The role of status," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 208-230.
    12. Jean Bédard & Suzanne M. Paquette, 2021. "Audit Committee Financial Expertise, Litigation Risk, and Auditor‐Provided Tax Services†," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 7-48, March.
    13. repec:mth:ijafr8:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:450-461 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Ya-Fang Wang, 2020. "New Insights on Audit Quality," International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences Applied Research (IJBESAR), International Hellenic University (IHU), Kavala Campus, Greece (formerly Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of Technology - EMaTTech), vol. 13(1), pages 21-28, April.
    15. Patrick Velte, 2023. "The link between corporate governance and corporate financial misconduct. A review of archival studies and implications for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 353-411, February.
    16. Sarah B. Stuber & Chris E. Hogan, 2021. "Do PCAOB Inspections Improve the Accuracy of Accounting Estimates?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 331-370, March.
    17. Beardsley, Erik L. & Imdieke, Andrew J. & Omer, Thomas C., 2021. "The distraction effect of non-audit services on audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2).
    18. Limei Che & Ole-Kristian Hope & John Christian Langli, 2020. "How Big-4 Firms Improve Audit Quality," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4552-4572, October.
    19. Raphael Duguay & Michael Minnis & Andrew Sutherland, 2020. "Regulatory Spillovers in Common Audit Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3389-3411, August.
    20. Kevin Koh & Li Li & Xuejiao Liu & Chunfei Wang, 2023. "The Effect of Audit Partner Diversity on Audit Quality: Evidence from China," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 59(1), pages 340-380, March.
    21. Al-Hadi, Ahmed & Habib, Ahsan, 2023. "Consequences of state-level regulations in accounting, finance, and corporate governance: A review," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auditor over-conservatism; Going concern audit opinion; Prediction model approach;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:212:y:2022:i:c:s016517652200012x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.