IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/sampjp/sampj-07-2019-0277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Air pollution, auditors' pessimistic bias and audit quality: evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Huangyue Chen
  • Xiaoping Tan
  • Qun CAO

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to investigate whether and how air pollution affects auditor behavior and audit quality. Specifically, the authors draw from studies of behavioral economics and psychology to develop a new prediction that air pollution-induced negative mood causes pessimistic bias in auditors’ risk assessments of client firms, which motivates them to put more effort into achieving higher audit quality. Design/methodology/approach - This study uses a sample of Chinese public firms for the period 2013 to 2018 and an ordinary least squares model to examine the effects of air pollution on audit quality. Findings - The results suggest that auditors exposed to higher levels of air pollution are more likely to put more effort into their audits, resulting in higher audit quality. Furthermore, the impacts of air pollution on audit quality are more pronounced when an auditor has a higher level of education, a major in accounting or a related subject and a position as a partner. A series of identification tests and sensitivity tests further support the main findings. Practical implications - This study provides deeper insight into how air pollution affects auditors’ decision-making through its effect on mood. Social implications - The findings have broad potential implications for auditing and other high-skill professions. Because air pollution-induced negative mood is a common occurrence and numerous psychological experiments have demonstrated the potentially adaptive and beneficial role of negative mood in decision-making for professions like auditing that need a more conservative, alert and detail-oriented cognitive style, negative mood may to some extent facilitate decision-making. Professionals may benefit from paying closer attention to the adaptive benefits of different moods. Originality/value - Few studies empirically discuss the effects of auditors’ psychology on audit outcomes. This study responds to this research gap with analyzes of how air pollution-induced negative mood can affect auditors’ professional judgment and audit outcomes. Further, this study adds to the growing literature that examines how air pollution affects various aspects of the economy and enriches the literature on behavioral economics, providing empirical evidence from a large sample of the effects of an environmental stressor on individual auditors’ professional judgment.

Suggested Citation

  • Huangyue Chen & Xiaoping Tan & Qun CAO, 2020. "Air pollution, auditors' pessimistic bias and audit quality: evidence from China," Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(1), pages 74-104, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:sampjp:sampj-07-2019-0277
    DOI: 10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2019-0277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2019-0277/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/SAMPJ-07-2019-0277/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/SAMPJ-07-2019-0277?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Jie & Wang, Wanwan & Yuan, Fang, 2023. "Air pollution and corporate risk-taking: Evidence from China," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 570-586.

    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:sampjp:sampj-07-2019-0277. 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.