IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v35y2018i1p245-276.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting Comparability, Audit Effort, and Audit Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph H. Zhang

Abstract

Accounting comparability among peer firms in the same industry reflects the similarity and the relatedness of firms’ operating environments and financial reporting. From the perspectives of “inherent audit risk” and “external information efficiency,” comparability is helpful for auditors in assessing client audit risk and lowers the costs of information acquisition, processing, and testing. I posit that the availability of information about comparable clients helps improve audit efficiency and accuracy. Empirical results show that comparability is negatively related to audit effort (surrogated by audit fees and audit delay). Moreover, comparability is negatively associated with the likelihood of audit opinion errors. These findings are robust to different specifications of regression models, particularly for the “endogeneity” issues due to the possible reverse causality that auditor style might influence client firms’ comparability. In sum, the study shows that accounting comparability enhances the utility of accounting information for external audits. La comparabilité de l'information comptable entre sociétés homologues appartenant au même secteur d'activité reflète la similitude et la parenté des environnements d'exploitation des sociétés et de leur information financière. Dans la perspective du « risque d'audit inhérent » et de l’« efficience de l'information externe », la comparabilité est utile aux auditeurs dans l’évaluation du risque d'audit associé à un client et elle réduit les coûts d'acquisition, de traitement et de contrôle de l'information. L'auteur pose l'hypothèse selon laquelle la disponibilité d'information relative à des clients comparables contribue à l'amélioration de l'efficience et de l'exactitude de l'audit. Les résultats empiriques montrent l'existence d'un lien négatif entre la comparabilité et le travail d'audit (dont rendent compte les variables de substitution que sont les honoraires d'audit et le temps nécessaire à la production du rapport d'audit). De plus, la comparabilité affiche un lien négatif avec la probabilité d'erreurs dans l'opinion d'audit exprimée. Ces observations résistent à différentes spécifications des modèles de régression, en particulier aux problèmes d’« endogénéité » attribuables au lien de causalité inverse possible faisant que le style adopté par l'auditeur puisse influer sur la comparabilité des sociétés clientes. L’étude montre, en somme, que la comparabilité de l'information comptable accroît l'utilité de l'information comptable pour les audits externes.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph H. Zhang, 2018. "Accounting Comparability, Audit Effort, and Audit Outcomes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 245-276, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:35:y:2018:i:1:p:245-276
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12381
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12381?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
    ---><---

    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:coacre:v:35:y:2018:i:1:p:245-276. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.