IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hol/holodi/9807.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Relationship Between Auditor Accuracy and Auditor Size: An Evaluation of Reputation and Deep Pockets Arguments

Author

Listed:
  • Clive Lennox

    (University of Bristol)

Abstract

Empirical results presented in this paper indicate that large auditors are more accurate than small auditors. DeAngelo (1981) has argued that large auditors have more incentive to maintain a reputation for accurate auditing because an audit failure may lead to a loss of rents due to auditor switching. In addition, Dye (1993) and Schwartz 1997) have shown that the depth of an auditor's pockets may be an important determinant of accuracy. The aim of this paper is to discriminate between these two explanations. In a deep pockets model, it is shown that large auditors may receive relatively more litigation despite having more incentive to issue accurate-reports. This is consistent with evidence presented in this paper. On the other hand, the evidence does not indicate that auditors suffer losses of clients or lower fees as a result of criticism. These findings suggest that deep pockets rather than reputation help to explain the superior accuracy of large auditors.

Suggested Citation

  • Clive Lennox, 1998. "The Relationship Between Auditor Accuracy and Auditor Size: An Evaluation of Reputation and Deep Pockets Arguments," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 98/7, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Feb 1998.
  • Handle: RePEc:hol:holodi:9807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rhul.ac.uk/economics/Research/WorkingPapers/pdf/dpe9807.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:hol:holodi:9807. 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: Claire Blackman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.rhul.ac.uk/economics/ .

    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.