IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reaccs/v24y2019i2d10.1007_s11142-019-09490-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Auditor benchmarking of client disclosures

Author

Listed:
  • Michael S. Drake

    (Brigham Young University)

  • Phillip T. Lamoreaux

    (Arizona State University)

  • Phillip J. Quinn

    (University of Washington)

  • Jacob R. Thornock

    (Brigham Young University)

Abstract

We examine auditors’ disclosure benchmarking, which we define as auditors’ acquisition of nonclient financial statement information for the purpose of evaluating a client’s financial statement information. Employing a novel dataset that captures auditors’ access of nonclient annual and quarterly SEC filings on EDGAR, we predict and find that auditors engage in disclosure benchmarking when auditing clients are faced with higher levels of authoritative guidance, financial-reporting uncertainty, and litigation risk. Lastly, we predict that auditors incorporate the information they obtain into their audit. Consistent with our prediction, disclosure benchmarking is positively associated with a client’s financial statement disaggregation, and client footnotes exhibit greater comparability to targeted nonclients’ footnotes after disclosure benchmarking. Overall, this study offers an empirical look into the “black box” of the audit process.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael S. Drake & Phillip T. Lamoreaux & Phillip J. Quinn & Jacob R. Thornock, 2019. "Auditor benchmarking of client disclosures," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 393-425, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reaccs:v:24:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11142-019-09490-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11142-019-09490-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11142-019-09490-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11142-019-09490-3?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Drake, Michael S. & Roulstone, Darren T. & Thornock, Jacob R., 2016. "The usefulness of historical accounting reports," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 448-464.
    2. Zimmerman, Jerold L., 1983. "Taxes and firm size," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 119-149, April.
    3. Michael S. Drake & Darren T. Roulstone & Jacob R. Thornock, 2015. "The Determinants and Consequences of Information Acquisition via EDGAR," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 1128-1161, September.
    4. Lawrence D. Brown & Andrew C. Call & Michael B. Clement & Nathan Y. Sharp, 2015. "Inside the “Black Box” of Sell‐Side Financial Analysts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 1-47, March.
    5. Shuping Chen & Bin Miao & Terry Shevlin, 2015. "A New Measure of Disclosure Quality: The Level of Disaggregation of Accounting Data in Annual Reports," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 1017-1054, December.
    6. Tim Loughran & Bill Mcdonald, 2014. "Measuring Readability in Financial Disclosures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(4), pages 1643-1671, August.
    7. Harrison Hong & Jeffrey D. Kubik & Amit Solomon, 2000. "Security Analysts' Career Concerns and Herding of Earnings Forecasts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 121-144, Spring.
    8. Lang, Mark & Stice-Lawrence, Lorien, 2015. "Textual analysis and international financial reporting: Large sample evidence," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 110-135.
    9. Kenneth J. Reichelt & Dechun Wang, 2010. "National and Office‐Specific Measures of Auditor Industry Expertise and Effects on Audit Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 647-686, June.
    10. Paul Hribar & D. Craig Nichols, 2007. "The Use of Unsigned Earnings Quality Measures in Tests of Earnings Management," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 1017-1053, December.
    11. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    12. Abarbanell, Jeffery S. & Lanen, William N. & Verrecchia, Robert E., 1995. "Analysts' forecasts as proxies for investor beliefs in empirical research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 31-60, July.
    13. D. Eric Hirst & Lisa Koonce & Shankar Venkataraman, 2007. "How Disaggregation Enhances the Credibility of Management Earnings Forecasts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 811-837, September.
    14. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817.
    15. Kim, Irene & Skinner, Douglas J., 2012. "Measuring securities litigation risk," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 290-310.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Hallman, Nicholas J. & Kartapanis, Antonis & Schmidt, Jaime J., 2022. "How do auditors respond to competition? Evidence from the bidding process," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    2. Bernard, Darren & Blackburne, Terrence & Thornock, Jacob, 2020. "Information flows among rivals and corporate investment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(3), pages 760-779.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blankespoor, Elizabeth & deHaan, Ed & Marinovic, Iván, 2020. "Disclosure processing costs, investors’ information choice, and equity market outcomes: A review," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2).
    2. Li, Frank Weikai & Sun, Chengzhu, 2022. "Information acquisition and expected returns: Evidence from EDGAR search traffic," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    3. Shivaram Rajgopal & Suraj Srinivasan & Xin Zheng, 2021. "Measuring audit quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 559-619, June.
    4. Xinming Liu & Gerald J. Lobo & Hung‐Chao Yu, 2021. "Is Audit Committee Equity Compensation Related to Audit Fees?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 740-769, March.
    5. de Kok, Ties, 2019. "Essays on reporting and information processing," Other publications TiSEM 468fd12b-19c0-4c7b-a33a-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Brian Gibbons & Peter Iliev & Jonathan Kalodimos, 2021. "Analyst Information Acquisition via EDGAR," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 769-793, February.
    7. Anna Bergman Brown & Nicole M. Heron & Hagit Levy & Emanuel Zur, 2023. "StoneRidge Investment Partners v. Scientific Atlanta: A Test of Auditor Litigation Risk," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 517-538, October.
    8. Jian Cao & Feng Chen & Julia L. Higgs, 2016. "Late for a very important date: financial reporting and audit implications of late 10-K filings," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 633-671, June.
    9. Sharad Asthana, 2017. "Diversification by the audit offices in the US and its impact on audit quality," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1003-1030, May.
    10. Callen, Jeffrey L. & Fang, Xiaohua & Zhang, Wenjun, 2020. "Protection of proprietary information and financial reporting opacity: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Shaw, Kenneth W. & Whitworth, James D., 2022. "Client importance and unconditional conservatism in complex accounting estimates," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    12. Neilson, Jed J., 2022. "Investor information gathering and the resolution of uncertainty," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1).
    13. Jing He & Marlene A. Plumlee, 2020. "Measuring disclosure using 8-K filings," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 903-962, September.
    14. Sanjay W. Bissessur & David Veenman, 2016. "Analyst information precision and small earnings surprises," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1327-1360, December.
    15. Kristian D. Allee & Matthew D. Deangelis & James R. Moon, 2018. "Disclosure “Scriptability”," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 363-430, May.
    16. John Donovan & Jared Jennings & Kevin Koharki & Joshua Lee, 2021. "Measuring credit risk using qualitative disclosure," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 815-863, June.
    17. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    18. Umar, Tarik, 2022. "Complexity aversion when SeekingAlpha," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    19. Drago, Carlo & Ginesti, Gianluca & Pongelli, Claudia & Sciascia, Salvatore, 2018. "Reporting strategies: What makes family firms beat around the bush? Family-related antecedents of annual report readability," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 142-150.
    20. Singh, Abhijeet & Singh, Harjinder & Sultana, Nigar & Evans, John, 2019. "Independent and joint effects of audit partner tenure and non-audit fees on audit quality," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 186-205.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Disclosure benchmarking; Audit process; Information acquisition; Client financial reporting; EDGAR filings;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K22 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Business and Securities Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M49 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Other

    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:spr:reaccs:v:24:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11142-019-09490-3. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.