IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jforec/v39y2020i4p687-706.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the going‐concern status for companies: An ensemble framework‐based model

Author

Listed:
  • Yu‐Feng Hsu
  • Wei‐Po Lee

Abstract

Issuing a going‐concern opinion is a difficult and complex task for auditors. The auditors have to take into account different critical factors in order to make the right decision based on information obtained from the auditing process. This study adopts the so‐called “random forest” approach (based on the ensemble method) to assist auditors in making such a decision. To investigate the corresponding effect of the proposed approach, we conduct a series of experiments and a performance comparison. The results show that the random forest method outperforms the baseline methods in terms of the accuracy rate, ROC area, kappa value, type II error, precision, and recall rate. The proposed approach is proven to be more accurate and stable than previous methods.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:39:y:2020:i:4:p:687-706
    DOI: 10.1002/for.2653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/for.2653
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/for.2653?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. Chee‐Yeow Lim & Hun‐Tong Tan, 2008. "Non‐audit Service Fees and Audit Quality: The Impact of Auditor Specialization," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 199-246, March.
    2. Deakin, Eb, 1972. "Discriminant Analysis Of Predictors Of Business Failure," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 167-179.
    3. Bell, Tb & Tabor, Rh, 1991. "Empirical-Analysis Of Audit Uncertainty Qualifications," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 350-370.
    4. Jiang, Wei & Rupley, Kathleen Hertz & Wu, Jia, 2010. "Internal control deficiencies and the issuance of going concern opinions," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 40-46.
    5. 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.
    6. Mark L. DeFond & K. Raghunandan & K.R. Subramanyam, 2002. "Do Non–Audit Service Fees Impair Auditor Independence? Evidence from Going Concern Audit Opinions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 1247-1274, September.
    7. Chan Li, 2009. "Does Client Importance Affect Auditor Independence at the Office Level? Empirical Evidence from Going†Concern Opinions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 201-230, March.
    8. Kenneth J. Reichelt & Dechun Wang, 2010. "National and Office‐Specific Measures of Auditor Industry Expertise and Effects on Audit Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 647-686, June.
    9. 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)

    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. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. Bruynseels, Liesbeth & Willekens, Marleen, 2012. "The effect of strategic and operating turnaround initiatives on audit reporting for distressed companies," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 223-241.
    3. Nathan R. Berglund, 2020. "Do Client Bankruptcies Preceded by Clean Audit Opinions Damage Auditor Reputation?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 1914-1951, September.
    4. Thomas C. Omer & Nathan Y. Sharp & Dechun Wang, 2018. "The Impact of Religion on the Going Concern Reporting Decisions of Local Audit Offices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(4), pages 811-831, June.
    5. 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).
    6. Keval Amin & John Daniel Eshleman & Peng Guo, 2021. "Investor Sentiment, Misstatements, and Auditor Behavior," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 483-517, March.
    7. Yihan Guo & Deborah Delaney & Ammad Ahmed, 2020. "Is an Auditor's Propensity to Issue Going Concern Opinions a Valid Measure of Audit Quality?," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 30(2), pages 144-153, June.
    8. Bugeja, Martin, 2011. "Takeover premiums and the perception of auditor independence and reputation," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 278-293.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    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. Beardsley, Erik L. & Imdieke, Andrew J. & Omer, Thomas C., 2021. "The distraction effect of non-audit services on audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2).
    14. Legoria, Joseph & Rosa, Gina & Soileau, Jared S., 2017. "Audit quality across non-audit service fee benchmarks: Evidence from material weakness opinions," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 97-108.
    15. 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.
    16. Guangming Gong & Liang Xiao & Si Xu & Xun Gong, 2019. "Do Bond Investors Care About Engagement Auditors’ Negative Experiences? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 779-806, September.
    17. Xingqiang Du & Yiqi Zhang & Shaojuan Lai & Hexin Tao, 2024. "How Do Auditors Value Hypocrisy? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 191(3), pages 501-533, May.
    18. Mei Feng & Chan Li, 2014. "Are Auditors Professionally Skeptical? Evidence from Auditors’ Going‐Concern Opinions and Management Earnings Forecasts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(5), pages 1061-1085, December.
    19. Xingqiang Du & Wei Jian & Quan Zeng & Yingying Chang, 2018. "Do Auditors Applaud Corporate Environmental Performance? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(4), pages 1049-1080, September.
    20. Timothy B. Bell & David B. Bryan, 2021. "Effectiveness, efficiency, and fee premiums in audits led by industry specialist partners," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(3), pages 4513-4572, September.

    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:jforec:v:39:y:2020:i:4:p:687-706. 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://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/2966 .

    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.