IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/wly/coacre/v14y1997i3p481-499.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Resource Allocation Decisions in Audit Engagements

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Laurence Kranich & Andrés Perea & Hans Peters, 2005. "Core Concepts For Dynamic Tu Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 43-61.
  2. Schelleman, C.C.M., 2001. "Determinants of the profitability of audit engagements : an empirical study," Research Memorandum 037, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  3. Bedard, Jean C. & Hoitash, Udi & Hoitash, Rani, 2008. "Audit pricing and internal control disclosures among non-accelerated filers," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 103-126.
  4. Vieru, Markku & Schadewitz, Hannu, 2010. "Impact of IFRS transition on audit and non-audit fees: evidence from small and medium-sized listed companies in Finland," MPRA Paper 44664, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  5. Karl E. Hackenbrack & Chris E. Hogan, 2002. "Market Response to Earnings Surprises Conditional on Reasons for an Auditor Change," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 195-223, June.
  6. Wu, Bin & Wu, Yaqian & Zhang, Min & Li, Jiyuan, 2024. "Opening the black box of human resource allocations in audit firms: The assignment of audit partners to audit engagements," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(2).
  7. Kim, Hyung-Tae & Lee, Seungwon & Park, Sung-Jin & Lee, Brandon, 2019. "Audit fees and corporate innovation: Auditors' response to corporate innovation," MPRA Paper 101081, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  8. Muhammad Farhan Malik & Yuan George Shan & Jamie Yixing Tong, 2022. "Do auditors price litigious tone?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1715-1760, April.
  9. Timothy B. Bell & Rajib Doogar & Ira Solomon, 2008. "Audit Labor Usage and Fees under Business Risk Auditing," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 729-760, September.
  10. Slapničar, Sergeja & Vuko, Tina & Čular, Marko & Drašček, Matej, 2022. "Effectiveness of cybersecurity audit," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
  11. Kar‐Ming Chong & Colin Dolley & Keith Houghton & Gary S. Monroe, 2009. "Effect of outsourcing public sector audits on cost‐efficiency," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 49(4), pages 675-695, December.
  12. Hronsky, Jane J. F. & Houghton, Keith A., 2001. "The meaning of a defined accounting concept: regulatory changes and the effect on auditor decision making," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 123-139, March.
  13. Ahsan Habib & Mostafa Monzur Hasan & Ahmed Al-Hadi, 2018. "Money laundering and audit fees," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(4), pages 427-459, June.
  14. Feng Chen & Songlan Peng & Shuang Xue & Zhifeng Yang & Feiteng Ye, 2016. "Do Audit Clients Successfully Engage in Opinion Shopping? Partner‐Level Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 79-112, March.
  15. Duellman, Scott & Hurwitz, Helen & Sun, Yan, 2015. "Managerial overconfidence and audit fees," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 148-165.
  16. Karla M. Johnstone & Jean C. Bedard & Michael L. Ettredge, 2004. "The Effect of Competitive Bidding on Engagement Planning and Pricing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 25-53, March.
  17. Gil S. Bae & Seung UK Choi & Phillip T. Lamoreaux & Jae Eun Lee, 2021. "Auditors' Fee Premiums and Low‐Quality Internal Controls," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 586-620, March.
  18. David Hay & Robert Knechel & Vivian Li, 2006. "Non‐audit Services and Auditor Independence: New Zealand Evidence," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5‐6), pages 715-734, June.
  19. Chen, Vincent Y.S. & Keung, Edmund C. & Lin, I-Min, 2019. "Disclosure of fair value measurement in goodwill impairment test and audit fees," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
  20. John Ziyang Zhang & Yangxin Yu, 2016. "Does Board Independence Affect Audit Fees? Evidence from Recent Regulatory Reforms," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 793-814, October.
  21. David C. Hay & W. Robert Knechel & Norman Wong, 2006. "Audit Fees: A Meta†analysis of the Effect of Supply and Demand Attributes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 141-191, March.
  22. Christensen, Brant E. & Newton, Nathan J. & Wilkins, Michael S., 2021. "How do team workloads and team staffing affect the audit? Archival evidence from U.S. audits," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
  23. Akihiro Yamada & Kento Fujita, 2022. "Impact of Parent Companies and Multiple Large Shareholders on Audit Fees in Stakeholder-Oriented Corporate Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.
  24. Yao, Dai Fei (Troy) & Percy, Majella & Hu, Fang, 2015. "Fair value accounting for non-current assets and audit fees: Evidence from Australian companies," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 31-45.
  25. Joseph F. Brazel & Christopher P. Agoglia, 2007. "An Examination of Auditor Planning Judgements in a Complex Accounting Information System Environment," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 1059-1083, December.
  26. W. Robert Knechel & Marleen Willekens, 2006. "The Role of Risk Management and Governance in Determining Audit Demand," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(9‐10), pages 1344-1367, November.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.