Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRusmin, Rusmin
dc.contributor.authorTower, Greg
dc.contributor.authorBrown, Alistair
dc.contributor.authorVan der Zahn, J-L.
dc.date.accessioned2017-01-30T11:31:43Z
dc.date.available2017-01-30T11:31:43Z
dc.date.created2012-03-23T01:19:39Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.citationRusmin, Rusmin and Tower, Greg and Brown, Alistair and Van der Zahn, J-L.W. Mitchell. 2009. Audit quality, monitoring mechanisms and auditor reporting behaviour. Financial Reporting Regulation and Governance. 8 (1): pp. 1-26.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/12617
dc.description.abstract

This study extends previous research by empirically investigating the relationship of audit quality and governance monitoring mechanisms with the probability of receiving a qualified audit report. Using Australian manufacturing company data we find that Big 4 auditors are more likely to issue a clean audit report. We also note that auditors are less likely to qualify a certain firm’s financial statements when higher levels of non-audit fees are derived. Finally, this study adds to the growing body of literature that documents the importance of boards’ role in monitoring management behavior; that is, we find that smaller size boards appear to be less effective than larger size boards. The above findings have implications about the perception of auditor independence and effectiveness of board of directors.

dc.publisherCurtin Business School
dc.subjectAudit
dc.subjectreporting behaviour
dc.subjectmonitoring mechanisms
dc.titleAudit quality, monitoring mechanisms and auditor reporting behaviour
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.source.volume8
dcterms.source.number1
dcterms.source.startPage1
dcterms.source.endPage26
dcterms.source.issn14492318
dcterms.source.titleFinancial Reporting Regulation and Governance
curtin.departmentSchool of Accounting
curtin.accessStatusOpen access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record