IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/ajbpps/ajb-01-2020-0008.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Have changes in audit standards altered client perceptions of auditors?

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus Doxey
  • Robert Ewing

Abstract

Purpose - Changes in external auditing over four decades motivates a historical investigation of how client employees' perceptions of auditors have changed across this period. Design/methodology/approach - This paper uses a longitudinal quasi-experiment to compare current client employees' perceptions of the auditor with results from 1972. Findings - Changes in client employees' perceptions of the audit, its usefulness and of auditor-client conflict suggest increases in auditor independence. However, this paper also finds that despite decades of efforts to strengthen auditor independence and skepticism, the primary analogy client employees apply to the external auditor remains “consultant”. Practical implications - The findings contribute to the discussion of whether regulatory and standard changes in the audit environment have changed aspects of client employees' perceptions of auditors. Originality/value - The paper contributes by presenting a unique approach to partially replicating a historic study using a quasi-experimental research design.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus Doxey & Robert Ewing, 2020. "Have changes in audit standards altered client perceptions of auditors?," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 36(2), pages 109-127, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:ajbpps:ajb-01-2020-0008
    DOI: 10.1108/AJB-01-2020-0008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AJB-01-2020-0008/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AJB-01-2020-0008/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AJB-01-2020-0008?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.

    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:eme:ajbpps:ajb-01-2020-0008. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.