IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/isacfm/v10y2001i1p1-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision‐making capabilities of a hybrid system applied to the auditor's going‐concern assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Mary Jane Lenard
  • Pervaiz Alam
  • David Booth
  • Gregory Madey

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate a hybrid system as a decision support model to assist with the auditor's going‐concern assessment. The going‐concern assessment is often an unstructured decision that involves the use of both qualitative and quantitative information. An expert system that predicts the going‐concern decision has been developed in consultation with partners at three of the Big Five accounting firms. This system is combined with a statistical model that predicts bankruptcy, as a component of the auditor's decision, to form a hybrid system. The hybrid system, because it combines the use of quantitative and qualitative information, has the potential for better prediction accuracy than either the expert system or statistical model predicting separately. In addition, testing of the system provides some insight into the characteristics of firms that experience problems, but do not necessarily receive a going‐concern modification. Further investigation into those firms that have problems could reveal factors that may be incorporated into decision support systems for auditors, in order to improve accuracy and reliability of these decision tools. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary Jane Lenard & Pervaiz Alam & David Booth & Gregory Madey, 2001. "Decision‐making capabilities of a hybrid system applied to the auditor's going‐concern assessment," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:isacfm:v:10:y:2001:i:1:p:1-23
    DOI: 10.1002/isaf.190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/isaf.190
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/isaf.190?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. O' Keefe, Robert M. & Preece, Alun D., 1996. "The development, validation and implementation of knowledge-based systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 458-473, August.
    2. Bell, Tb & Tabor, Rh, 1991. "Empirical-Analysis Of Audit Uncertainty Qualifications," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 350-370.
    3. Pandey, P. C. & Khokhajaikiat, Porntep, 1996. "Performance modeling of multistage production systems operating under hybrid push/pull control," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 115-126, June.
    4. Mutchler, JF & Hopwood, W & McKeown, JM, 1997. "The influence of contrary information and mitigating factors on audit opinion decisions on bankrupt companies," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 295-310.
    5. Ohlson, Ja, 1980. "Financial Ratios And The Probabilistic Prediction Of Bankruptcy," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 109-131.
    6. Zmijewski, Me, 1984. "Methodological Issues Related To The Estimation Of Financial Distress Prediction Models," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22, pages 59-82.
    7. Gentry, Ja & Newbold, P & Whitford, Dt, 1985. "Classifying Bankrupt Firms With Funds Flow Components," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 146-160.
    8. Kida, T, 1980. "An Investigation Into Auditors Continuity And Related Qualification Judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 506-523.
    9. Pandey, P. C. & Khokhajaikiat, Porntep, 1996. "Performance modeling of multistage production systems operating under hybrid push/pull control," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 17-28, May.
    10. Hansen, James V. & Messier, William F., 1986. "A knowledge-based expert system for auditing advanced computer systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 371-379, September.
    11. WILLIAM HOPWOOD & JAMES C. McKEOWN & JANE F. MUTCHLER, 1994. "A Reexamination of Auditor versus Model Accuracy within the Context of the Going†Concern Opinion Decision," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 409-431, March.
    12. Krishnagopal Menon & Kenneth B. Schwartz, 1987. "An empirical investigation of audit qualification decisions in the presence of going concern uncertainties," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), pages 302-315, March.
    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. Amelia A. Baldwin & Carol E. Brown & Brad S. Trinkle, 2006. "Opportunities for artificial intelligence development in the accounting domain: the case for auditing," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 77-86, July.
    2. Daniel E. O'Leary, 2009. "Downloads and citations in Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1‐2), pages 21-31, January.

    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. Ahsan Habib & Mabel D' Costa & Hedy Jiaying Huang & Md. Borhan Uddin Bhuiyan & Li Sun, 2020. "Determinants and consequences of financial distress: review of the empirical literature," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(S1), pages 1023-1075, April.
    2. Wu, Chloe Yu-Hsuan & Hsu, Hwa-Hsien & Haslam, Jim, 2016. "Audit committees, non-audit services, and auditor reporting decisions prior to failure," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 240-256.
    3. Chen, Peter F. & He, Shaohua & Ma, Zhiming & Stice, Derrald, 2016. "The information role of audit opinions in debt contracting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 121-144.
    4. Geiger, Marshall A. & Basioudis, Ilias G. & DeLange, Paul, 2022. "The effect of non-audit fees and industry specialization on the prevalence and accuracy of auditor’s going-concern reporting decisions," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    5. Jere R. Francis & Jagan Krishnan, 1999. "Accounting Accruals and Auditor Reporting Conservatism," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 135-165, March.
    6. Kim, Hyonok & Fukukawa, Hironori & Routledge, James, 2020. "A comparison of management and auditor going concern risk disclosure: Evidence from regulatory change in Japan," Working Paper Series 234, Management Innovation Research Center, School of Business Administration, Hitotsubashi University Business School.
    7. Elizabeth Gutierrez & Jake Krupa & Miguel Minutti-Meza & Maria Vulcheva, 2020. "Do going concern opinions provide incremental information to predict corporate defaults?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1344-1381, December.
    8. Chrysovalantis Gaganis, 2009. "Classification techniques for the identification of falsified financial statements: a comparative analysis," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 207-229, July.
    9. McGurr, Paul T. & DeVaney, Sharon A., 1998. "Predicting Business Failure of Retail Firms: An Analysis Using Mixed Industry Models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 169-176, November.
    10. Willenborg, Michael & McKeown, J.C.James C., 2000. "Going-concern initial public offerings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 279-313, December.
    11. Yu‐Feng Hsu & Wei‐Po Lee, 2020. "Evaluation of the going‐concern status for companies: An ensemble framework‐based model," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 687-706, July.
    12. Ann Gaeremynck & Marleen Willekens, 2003. "The endogenous relationship between audit-report type and business termination: evidence on private firms in a non-litigious environment," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 65-79.
    13. du Jardin, Philippe, 2015. "Bankruptcy prediction using terminal failure processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 286-303.
    14. David A. Hensher & Stewart Jones & William H. Greene, 2007. "An Error Component Logit Analysis of Corporate Bankruptcy and Insolvency Risk in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(260), pages 86-103, March.
    15. Gómez Aguilar, Nieves & Biedma López, Estíbaliz & Ruiz Barbadillo, Emiliano, 2018. "El efecto de la rotación de socio en la calidad de la auditoría," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 7-18.
    16. Jones, Stewart & Hensher, David A., 2007. "Modelling corporate failure: A multinomial nested logit analysis for unordered outcomes," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 89-107.
    17. Sanoran, Kanyarat (Lek), 2018. "Auditors’ going concern reporting accuracy during and after the global financial crisis," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 164-178.
    18. Sudhir Nanda & Parag Pendharkar, 2001. "Linear models for minimizing misclassification costs in bankruptcy prediction," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(3), pages 155-168, September.
    19. Gregory D. Kane & Frederick M. Richardson & Patricia Graybeal, 1996. "Recession†Induced Stress and the Prediction of Corporate Failure," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 631-650, September.
    20. Bartov, Eli & Gul, Ferdinand A. & Tsui, J.S.L.Judy S. L., 2000. "Discretionary-accruals models and audit qualifications," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 421-452, December.

    More about this item

    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:wly:isacfm:v:10:y:2001:i:1:p:1-23. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/1099-1174/ .

    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.