IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v37y2012i2p95-115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do changes in audit actions and attitudes consistent with increased auditor scepticism deter aggressive earnings management? An experimental investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Qiu
  • Kelly, Khim
  • Salterio, Steven E.

Abstract

Audits are claimed to not only enhance the detection of fraud but also the deterrence of fraud. This study examines whether different audit procedures and attitudes conveyed to management deter aggressive earnings management that may be fraudulent, and whether such different procedures and attitudes conveyed influence managers’ perceptions about the ethicality of any anticipated earnings management. In an experiment with 171 senior corporate managers, we find that compared to the condition where the audit proceeds the same as last year, managers anticipate that there would be less earnings management when the nature of evidence collected has increased probative value; and when the auditor conveys a more sceptical attitude via more critical inquiry combined with either an increase in the evidence extent (increased sample size) or the nature of the evidence. However, this reduction in anticipated earnings management is not found with either the increased extent of evidence collected alone or more critical inquiry alone, suggesting that a combination of action and attitude changes compared to a change in either action alone or attitude alone better signals to managers the heightened scepticism that enhances the effectiveness of auditor deterrence. We also find, after controlling for the underlying ethical disposition of managers, that the different audit procedures and attitudes conveyed to management affect managers’ perceptions of the ethicality of anticipated earnings management. Interestingly, the conditions that engender greater earnings management also paradoxically increase managers’ perceived unethicality of the anticipated earnings management. Together these findings have implications for how different changes in audit approaches may result in differential managerial responses about their intention to commit fraud and its appropriateness. This study is one of the first papers to provide experimental empirical evidence that specific audit actions conveying heightened scepticism have significant influence on managerial judgments and behaviours with respect to committing aggressive earnings management.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Qiu & Kelly, Khim & Salterio, Steven E., 2012. "Do changes in audit actions and attitudes consistent with increased auditor scepticism deter aggressive earnings management? An experimental investigation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 95-115.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:37:y:2012:i:2:p:95-115
    DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2011.11.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368211001085
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.aos.2011.11.001?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. Peecher, Mark E. & Schwartz, Rachel & Solomon, Ira, 2007. "It's all about audit quality: Perspectives on strategic-systems auditing," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4-5), pages 463-485.
    2. Lance Lochner, 2007. "Individual Perceptions of the Criminal Justice System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 444-460, March.
    3. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Lawrence P. Kalbers & William J. Cenker, 2007. "Organizational commitment and auditors in public accounting," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 22(4), pages 354-375, April.
    5. Bloomfield, R, 1999. "Discussion of an experimental investigation of auditor-auditee interaction under ambiguity," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37, pages 157-165.
    6. Knapp, Carol A. & Knapp, Michael C., 2001. "The effects of experience and explicit fraud risk assessment in detecting fraud with analytical procedures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 25-37, January.
    7. Baiman, S & Evans, Jh & Noel, J, 1987. "Optimal-Contracts With A Utility-Maximizing Auditor," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 217-244.
    8. Zimbelman, MF, 1997. "The effects of SAS no. 82 on auditors' attention to fraud risk factors and audit planning decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35, pages 75-97.
    9. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    10. McCracken, Susan & Salterio, Steven E. & Gibbins, Michael, 2008. "Auditor-client management relationships and roles in negotiating financial reporting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(4-5), pages 362-383.
    11. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    12. Asare, S. K. & Wright, A., 1997. "Hypothesis revision strategies in conducting analytical procedures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(8), pages 737-755, November.
    13. Phillips, F, 1999. "Auditor attention to and judgments of aggressive financial reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 167-189.
    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. Florian Hoos & Jorien Louise Pruijssers & Michel W. Lander, 2019. "Who’s Watching? Accountability in Different Audit Regimes and the Effects on Auditors’ Professional Skepticism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(2), pages 563-575, May.
    2. Dan Dacian Cuzdriorean, 2013. "Most Recent Findings In Earnings Management Area: Interesting Insights From Traditionally Top 5 Leading Accounting Journals," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 2(15), pages 1-5.
    3. Madher E. Hamdallah & Salem Al-N’eimat & Anan F. Srouji & Manaf Al-Okaily & Khaldoon Albitar, 2022. "The Effect of Apparent and Intellectual Sustainability Independence on the Credibility Gap of the Accounting Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-22, November.
    4. Pantic, B., 2016. "Comparability of financial reports: A literature review of most recent studies," Working Papers 6451, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    5. Kazunori Miwa & Satoshi Taguchi & Tatsushi Yamamoto, 2017. "Are IPOs “Overpriced?” Strategic Interactions between the Entrepreneur and the Underwriter," Discussion Paper Series DP2017-07, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    6. Marisa Agostini & Giovanni Favero, 2012. "Accounting fraud, business failure and creative auditing: A micro-analysis of the strange case of Sunbeam Corp," Working Papers 12, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia, revised Mar 2013.
    7. Takahiro Endo & Nidhi Srinivas & Yuki Tsuboyama, 2017. "The Role of Meta-organising in Legitimacy Recovery: The Case of Frozen Food Category in Japan," Discussion Paper Series DP2017-10, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    8. Sandeep Goel, 2014. "Creating Accounting Numbers Using Designed Choices: A Case Study of Indian Hotel Industry," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 3, pages 29-35, September.
    9. Pamela R. Murphy & Michael Wynes & Till‐Arne Hahn & Patricia G. Devine, 2020. "Why Are People Honest? Internal and External Motivations to Report Honestly†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 945-981, June.
    10. Bennett, G. Bradley & Hatfield, Richard C., 2018. "Staff auditors' proclivity for computer-mediated communication with clients and its effect on skeptical behavior," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 68, pages 42-57.
    11. Tim D. Bauer & Sean M. Hillison & Mark E. Peecher & Bradley Pomeroy, 2020. "Revising Audit Plans to Address Fraud Risk: A Case of “Do as I Advise, Not as I Do”?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 2558-2589, December.

    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. Marisa Agostini & Giovanni Favero, 2012. "Accounting fraud, business failure and creative auditing: A micro-analysis of the strange case of Sunbeam Corp," Working Papers 12, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia, revised Mar 2013.
    2. Luippold, Benjamin L. & Kida, Thomas & Piercey, M. David & Smith, James F., 2015. "Managing audits to manage earnings: The impact of diversions on an auditor’s detection of earnings management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-54.
    3. Blesse, Sebastian & Diegmann, André, 2022. "The place-based effects of police stations on crime: Evidence from station closures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    4. Philip A. Curry & Anindya Sen & George Orlov, 2016. "Crime, apprehension and clearance rates: Panel data evidence from Canadian provinces," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 481-514, May.
    5. Lisa R. Anderson & Gregory DeAngelo & Winand Emons & Beth Freeborn & Hannes Lang, 2017. "Penalty Structures And Deterrence In A Two-Stage Model: Experimental Evidence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1833-1867, October.
    6. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson & Dietrich Earnhart, 2022. "The role of experience in deterring crime: A theory of specific versus general deterrence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(4), pages 1833-1853, October.
    7. Dorfleitner, Gregor & Kreuzer, Christian & Sparrer, Christian, 2022. "To sin in secret is no sin at all: On the linkage of policy, society, culture, and firm characteristics with corporate scandals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 762-784.
    8. Gider, Jasmin, 2014. "Do SEC Detections Deter Insider Trading? Evidence from Earnings Announcements," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100343, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Giovanni Mastrobuoni & David A Rivers, 2019. "Optimising Criminal Behaviour and the Disutility of Prison," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1364-1399.
    10. Entorf, Horst, 2011. "Turning 18: What a Difference Application of Adult Criminal Law Makes," IZA Discussion Papers 5434, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Brian Bell & Stephen Machin, 2013. "Immigration and crime," Chapters, in: Amelie F. Constant & Klaus F. Zimmermann (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Migration, chapter 19, pages 353-372, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Lana Friesen & Dietrich Earnhart, 2012. "Environmental Management Responses to Punishment: Specific Deterrence and Certainty versus Severity of Punishment," Discussion Papers Series 463, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    13. Ina Garnefeld & Andreas Eggert & Markus Husemann-Kopetzky & Eva Böhm, 2019. "Exploring the link between payment schemes and customer fraud: a mental accounting perspective," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 595-616, July.
    14. Muhammad Awais Anwa & Samia Nasreen & Anam Shahzadi, 2015. "Social and Demographic Determinants of Crime in Pakistan: A Panel Data Analysis of Province Punjab," International Journal of Economics and Empirical Research (IJEER), The Economics and Social Development Organization (TESDO), vol. 3(9), pages 440-447, September.
    15. Helen Tauchen, 2010. "Estimating the Supply of Crime: Recent Advances," Chapters, in: Bruce L. Benson & Paul R. Zimmerman (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Crime, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Florian Baumann & Tim Friehe, 2013. "Cheap Talk About The Detection Probability," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 1-16.
    17. Michael Arnold & Eric Darmon & Sylvain Dejean & Thierry Penard, 2014. "Graduated Response Policy and the Behavior of Digital Pirates: Evidence from the French Three-Strike (Hadopi) Law," Working Papers 14-07, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    18. George Saridakis & Sandra Sookram, 2014. "Violent Crime and Perceived Deterrence: An Empirical Approach using the Offending Crime and Justice Survey," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 19(1), pages 23-56, March.
    19. Songman Kang, 2016. "Inequality and crime revisited: effects of local inequality and economic segregation on crime," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 593-626, April.
    20. Angela K. Dills & Jeffrey A. Miron & Garrett Summers, 2010. "What Do Economists Know about Crime?," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Crime: Lessons For and From Latin America, pages 269-302, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:eee:aosoci:v:37:y:2012:i:2:p:95-115. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/aos .

    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.