IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v22y2005i4p759-789.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Independence Threats, Litigation Risk, and the Auditor's Decision Process

Author

Listed:
  • Allen D. Blay

Abstract

This study examines the effect of independence threats and litigation risk on auditors' evaluation of information and subsequent reporting choices. Using a Web†based experiment, I tracked auditors' information gathering and evaluation leading to a going†concern reporting decision. Specifically, 48 audit managers assessed client survival likelihood, gathered additional information, and suggested audit report choices. I found that auditors facing high independence threats (fear of losing the client) evaluated information as more indicative of a surviving client and were more likely to suggest an unmodified audit report, consistent with client preferences. In contrast, auditors facing high litigation risk evaluated information as more indicative of a failing client and were more likely to suggest a modified audit report. In addition, the association between risk and report choice was fully mediated by final information evaluation. This suggests that it is unlikely that different reporting choices resulted from a conscious choice bias, but rather that motivated reasoning during evidence evaluation plays a key role in the effect of risk in auditor decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Allen D. Blay, 2005. "Independence Threats, Litigation Risk, and the Auditor's Decision Process," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 759-789, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:22:y:2005:i:4:p:759-789
    DOI: 10.1506/5FQ9-ANEA-T8J0-U6GY
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1506/5FQ9-ANEA-T8J0-U6GY
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1506/5FQ9-ANEA-T8J0-U6GY?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lori Shefchik Bhaskar & Patrick E. Hopkins & Joseph H. Schroeder, 2019. "An Investigation of Auditors’ Judgments When Companies Release Earnings Before Audit Completion," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 355-390, May.
    2. Koch, Christopher & Weber, Martin & Wüstemann, Jens, 2007. "Can auditors be independent? : Experimental evidence," Papers 07-59, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    3. 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).
    4. Jürgen Ernstberger & Christopher Koch & Eva Maria Schreiber & Greg Trompeter, 2020. "Are Audit Firms' Compensation Policies Associated with Audit Quality?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 218-244, March.
    5. Muñoz-Izquierdo, Nora & Segovia-Vargas, María Jesús & Camacho-Miñano, María-del-Mar & Pascual-Ezama, David, 2019. "Explaining the causes of business failure using audit report disclosures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 403-414.
    6. Papirakis, Rachel, 2022. "Auditors’ self-actualization and ability to resist client pressure: Evidence from Canada," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    7. Christensen, Brant & Lei, Lijun (Gillian) & Shu, Sydney Qing & Thomas, Wayne, 2023. "Does audit regulation improve the underlying information used by managers? Evidence from PCAOB inspection access and management forecast accuracy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Downar, Benedikt & Ernstberger, Jürgen & Koch, Christopher, 2021. "Who makes partner in Big 4 audit firms? – Evidence from Germany," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    9. Ahmed A. Diab & Samir I. Abdelazim & Aref M. Eissa & Eid Mahmoud Abozaid & Mona Mohamed Elshaabany, 2021. "The Impact of Client Size and Financial Performance on Audit Opinion: Evidence from a Developing Market," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 10, January.
    10. Christine Gimbar & Molly Mercer, 2021. "Do Auditors Accurately Predict Litigation and Reputation Consequences of Inaccurate Accounting Estimates?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 276-301, March.
    11. Linda Myers & Jaime Schmidt & Michael Wilkins, 2014. "An investigation of recent changes in going concern reporting decisions among Big N and non-Big N auditors," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 155-172, July.
    12. Piñeiro Sánchez Carlos & Llano Monelos Pablo De & Rodríguez López Manuel, 2013. "A parsimonious model to forecast financial distress, based on audit evidence," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 58(4), pages 151-173, octubre-d.
    13. Llano Monelos Pablo De & Piñeiro Sánchez Carlos & Rodríguez López Manuel, 2014. "DEA as a business failure prediction tool. Application to the case of galician SMEs," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 59(2), pages 65-96, abril-jun.
    14. Nora Muñoz-Izquierdo & María-del-Mar Camacho-Miñano & María-Jesús Segovia-Vargas & David Pascual-Ezama, 2019. "Is the External Audit Report Useful for Bankruptcy Prediction? Evidence Using Artificial Intelligence," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, April.
    15. Os¨¦e Hanko, 2016. "The Quality of External Audit in OHADA Space: A Qualitative Study with Board of Director¡¯s Members¡¯ Perception as Understanding Variable," Applied Finance and Accounting, Redfame publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 11-17, August.
    16. Ashley A. Austin & Jacqueline S. Hammersley & Michael A. Ricci, 2020. "Improving Auditors' Consideration of Evidence Contradicting Management's Estimate Assumptions†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 696-716, June.
    17. Jun Wang & Duo Wang, 2022. "Corporate Fraud and Accounting Firm Involvement: Evidence from China," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, April.
    18. Taewoo Kim, 2021. "Does a Manager Respond to a Going-Concern Audit Opinion with an Asymmetry in Gain and Loss?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.
    19. Backof, Ann G. & Bamber, E. Michael & Carpenter, Tina D., 2016. "Do auditor judgment frameworks help in constraining aggressive reporting? Evidence under more precise and less precise accounting standards," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-11.
    20. Dan Dhaliwal & Paul N. Michas & Vic Naiker & Divesh Sharma, 2020. "Greater Reliance on Major Customers and Auditor Going‐Concern Opinions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 160-188, March.
    21. Ricci, Michael A., 2022. "How better client service performance affects auditors' willingness to challenge management's preferred accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).

    More about this item

    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:wly:coacre:v:22:y:2005:i:4:p:759-789. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.