IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reacre/v21y2009i1p63-67.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A note on perceptions of auditors’ internal control report mandated by the PCAOB: Can reformatting the report enhance perceived value added?

Author

Listed:
  • Foster, Benjamin P.
  • McClain, Guy
  • Shastri, Trimbak

Abstract

The auditor’s report is a critical link in communicating financial data to users. Because of substantial audit costs incurred in integrated audits, the perceived value added by the auditor’s report becomes even more important. The auditor’s report prescribed by Auditing Standard No. 2 (and the new Auditing Standard No. 5) issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) includes a limitations paragraph. The SAS 58 audit report format that has been in use over 15 years does not contain a limitations paragraph. The SAS 58 report likely serves as a mental frame of reference (a referent report) for users evaluating other independent auditor’s report formats relating to assurance services, including the AS2 and AS5 reports. Whether inclusion of a limitations paragraph could adversely affect the users’ evaluation of the AS2 report is the focus of this study. In light of the publicity given to fraudulent financial reporting and other prevailing economic/environmental conditions, it is reasonable for users to expect that the auditor’s report provide a high degree of assurance regarding material fraud.

Suggested Citation

  • Foster, Benjamin P. & McClain, Guy & Shastri, Trimbak, 2009. "A note on perceptions of auditors’ internal control report mandated by the PCAOB: Can reformatting the report enhance perceived value added?," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 63-67.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reacre:v:21:y:2009:i:1:p:63-67
    DOI: 10.1016/j.racreg.2008.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105204570800009X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.racreg.2008.11.002?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. Kisielius, Jolita & Sternthal, Brian, 1986. "Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(4), pages 418-431, March.
    2. Pentland, Brian T., 1993. "Getting comfortable with the numbers: Auditing and the micro-production of macro-order," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(7-8), pages 605-620.
    3. Benjamin P. Foster & William Ornstein & Trimbak Shastri, 2007. "Audit costs, material weaknesses under SOX Section 404," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 22(7), pages 661-673, July.
    4. Bailey, Ke & Bylinski, Jh & Shields, Md, 1983. "Effects Of Audit Report Wording Changes On The Perceived Message," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 355-370.
    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. Foster, Benjamin P. & McClain, Guy & Shastri, Trimbak, 2010. "Impact on pre-and post-sarbanes oxley users’ perceptions by incorporating the auditor’s fraud detection responsibility into the auditor’s internal control report," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-113.

    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. Foster, Benjamin P. & McClain, Guy & Shastri, Trimbak, 2010. "Impact on pre-and post-sarbanes oxley users’ perceptions by incorporating the auditor’s fraud detection responsibility into the auditor’s internal control report," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-113.
    2. Frank D. Hodge & Roger D. Martin & Jamie H. Pratt, 2006. "Audit Qualifications of Income†Decreasing Accounting Choices," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 369-394, June.
    3. Guénin-Paracini, Henri & Malsch, Bertrand & Paillé, Anne Marché, 2014. "Fear and risk in the audit process," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 264-288.
    4. Olivier Herrbach, 2001. "Audit quality, auditor behaviour and the psychological contract," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 787-802.
    5. Goodson, Brian M. & Grenier, Jonathan H. & Maksymov, Eldar, 2023. "When law students think like audit litigation attorneys: Implications for experimental research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Mohammad Hudaib & Roszaini Haniffa, 2009. "Exploring auditor independence: an interpretive approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 221-246, January.
    7. Federica De Santis, 2016. "Auditing Standard Change and Auditors' Everyday Practice: A Field Study," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(12), pages 41-54, December.
    8. Namrata Malhotra & Timothy Morris, 2009. "Heterogeneity in Professional Service Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 895-922, September.
    9. Lorino, Philippe & Mourey, Damien & Schmidt, Géraldine, 2017. "Goffman's theory of frames and situated meaning-making in performance reviews. The case of a category management approach in the French retail sector," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 32-49.
    10. Gary S. Monroe & David R. Woodliff, 1994. "Great Expectations: Public Perceptions Of The Auditor's Role," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 4(8), pages 42-53, November.
    11. Bitbol-Saba, Nathalie & Dambrin, Claire, 2019. "“It’s not often we get a visit from a beautiful woman!” The body in client-auditor interactions and the masculinity of accountancy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    12. Anne Marie Garvey & Laura Parte & Bridget McNally & José Antonio Gonzalo-Angulo, 2021. "True and Fair Override: Accounting Expert Opinions, Explanations from Behavioural Theories, and Discussions for Sustainability Accounting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    13. Duboisée de Ricquebourg, Alan & Maroun, Warren, 2023. "How do auditor rotations affect key audit matters? Archival evidence from South African audits," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    14. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3505 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Seon Mi Kim & Yura Kim, 2017. "Product market competition on the effectiveness of internal control," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1-2), pages 163-182, April.
    16. Bay, Charlotta, 2018. "Makeover accounting: Investigating the meaning-making practices of financial accounts," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 44-54.
    17. Saher Aqel, 2014. "Independent Auditor’s Report: Messages Conveyed and Implications," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 5(5), pages 5-17, October.
    18. Serrano Cinca, C. & Mar Molinero, C. & Gallizo Larraz, J.L., 2005. "Country and size effects in financial ratios: A European perspective," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 26-47, August.
    19. Pomering, Alan & Johnson, Lester W., 2009. "Constructing a corporate social responsibility reputation using corporate image advertising," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 106-114.
    20. Jones, Keith T. & Hunt, Steven C. & Chen, Clement C., 2008. "Auditors’ performance evaluations: An experimental analysis of the effects of initial impressions and task-specific experience on information later recalled," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 213-224.
    21. Ali A. Al-Thuneibat & Basheer Ahmad Khamees & Nedal A. Al-Fayoumi, 2008. "The effect of qualified auditors' opinions on share prices: evidence from Jordan," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(1), pages 84-101, January.

    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:reacre:v:21:y:2009:i:1:p:63-67. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/research-in-accounting-regulation .

    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.