IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jappol/v17y1998i2p169-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Client risk and recent changes in the market for audit services

Author

Listed:
  • Jones, Frederick L.
  • Raghunandan, K.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Jones, Frederick L. & Raghunandan, K., 1998. "Client risk and recent changes in the market for audit services," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 169-181.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jappol:v:17:y:1998:i:2:p:169-181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278-4254(97)10002-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Vivek Mande & Myungsoo Son, 2011. "Do audit delays affect client retention?," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 26(1), pages 32-50, January.
    2. Abidin, Shamharir & Beattie, Vivien & Goodacre, Alan, 2010. "Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change: Evidence from the UK – 1998–2003," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 187-206.
    3. Katsuhiko Muramiya & Tomomi Takada, 2010. "Auditor Conservatism, Abnormal Accruals, and Going Concern Opinions," Discussion Papers 2010-64, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    4. Yu-Ting Hsieh & Chan-Jane Lin & Hsihui Chang, 2022. "Does office size matter in client acceptance decisions? Evidence from big 4 accounting firms," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 383-407, January.
    5. Mande, Vivek & Son, Myungsoo & Song, Hakjoon, 2017. "Auditor search periods as signals of engagement risk: Effects on auditor choice and audit pricing," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 15-29.
    6. 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.
    7. Omrane Guedhami & Jeffrey A. Pittman & Walid Saffar, 2014. "Auditor Choice in Politically Connected Firms," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 107-162, March.
    8. Kaplan, Steven E. & Williams, David D., 2012. "The changing relationship between audit firm size and going concern reporting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 322-341.
    9. Ilias G. Basioudis, 2007. "Auditor's Engagement Risk and Audit Fees: The Role of Audit Firm Alumni," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(9‐10), pages 1393-1422, November.
    10. Karla M. Johnstone & Jean C. Bedard, 2004. "Audit Firm Portfolio Management Decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 659-690, September.
    11. Beynon, Malcolm J. & Peel, Michael J., 2001. "Variable precision rough set theory and data discretisation: an application to corporate failure prediction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 561-576, December.
    12. Magdy Farag & Rafik Elias, 2011. "Relative audit fees and client loyalty in the audit market," Accounting Research Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 24(1), pages 79-93, July.
    13. Beynon, Malcolm J., 2005. "A novel technique of object ranking and classification under ignorance: An application to the corporate failure risk problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(2), pages 493-517, December.
    14. Linda Myers & Jaime Schmidt & Michael Wilkins, 2014. "An investigation of recent changes in going concern reporting decisions among Big N and non-Big N auditors," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 155-172, July.
    15. Samer Khalil, 2011. "The riskiness of audit firm continuing clients' portfolio," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 26(4), pages 335-349, April.
    16. Dennis M. López & Marshall K. Pitman, 2013. "Auditor workload compression and busy season portfolio changes – U.S. evidence," Working Papers 0216acc, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    17. Michael Peel & Roydon Roberts, 2003. "Audit fee determinants and auditor premiums: evidence from the micro-firm sub-market," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(3), pages 207-233.

    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:jappol:v:17:y:1998:i:2:p:169-181. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jaccpubpol .

    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.