IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/arapps/ara-04-2022-0096.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Readability of auditor reports: does audit market competition matter? Empirical evidence from Iran

Author

Listed:
  • Javad Rajabalizadeh

Abstract

Purpose - While existing research explores the impact of audit market competition on audit fees and audit quality, there is limited investigation into how competition in the audit market influences auditors' writing style. This study examines the relationship between audit market competition and the readability of audit reports in Iran, where competition is particularly intense, especially among private audit firms. Design/methodology/approach - The sample comprises 1,050 firm-year observations in Iran from 2012 to 2018. Readability measures, including theFogindex, Flesch-Reading-Ease (FRE) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), are employed to assess the readability of auditors' reports. The Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) is utilized to measure audit market competition, with lower index values indicating higher auditor competition. The concentration measure is multiplied by −1 to obtain the competition measure (AudComp). Alternative readability measures, such as the Flesch–Kincaid (FK) and Automated Readability Index (ARI) are used in additional robustness tests. Data on textual features of audit reports, auditor characteristics and other control variables are manually collected from annual reports of firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). Findings - The regression analysis results indicate a significant and positive association between audit market competition and audit report readability. Furthermore, a stronger positive and significant association is observed among private audit firms, where competition is more intense compared to state audit firms. These findings remain robust when using alternative readability measures and other sensitivity checks. Additional analysis reveals that the positive effect of competition on audit report readability is more pronounced in situations where the auditor remains unchanged and the audit market size is small. Originality/value - This paper expands the existing literature by examining the impact of audit market competition on audit report readability. It focuses on a unique audit market (Iran), where competition among audit firms is more intense than in developed countries due to the liberalization of the Iranian audit market in 2001 and the establishment of numerous private audit firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Javad Rajabalizadeh, 2023. "Readability of auditor reports: does audit market competition matter? Empirical evidence from Iran," Asian Review of Accounting, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(1), pages 1-28, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:arapps:ara-04-2022-0096
    DOI: 10.1108/ARA-04-2022-0096
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ARA-04-2022-0096/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ARA-04-2022-0096/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/ARA-04-2022-0096?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Audit market competition; Audit reports readability; Fog index; Emerging markets; M41; M42;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • 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:eme:arapps:ara-04-2022-0096. 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.