بررسی تأثیر ویژگی‌های مؤسسه حسابرسی بر کیفیت حسابرسی با رویکرد فراتحلیل
محورهای موضوعی : مالی اسلامی
محمدجواد زارع بهنمیری
1
*
,
فاطمه تلخابی
2
,
مریم عرفانی
3
1 - گروه حسابداري، دانشكده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه قم، قم، ايران.
2 - گروه حسابداری، موسسه آموزش عالي طلوع مهر، قم، ایران.
3 - گروه حسابداری، موسسه آموزش عالي طلوع مهر، قم، ایران.
کلید واژه: فراتحلیل, کیفیت حسابرسی, ویژگی‌های حسابرسی,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف: هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی تأثیر ویژگی‌های مؤسسه حسابرسی بر کیفیت حسابرسی با رویکرد فراتحلیل است. اهمیت و ضرورت موضوع منجر به مطالعات مختلفی در این حوزه شده است که باتوجه‌به تضاد و ناسازگاری نتایج و نیز حجم مطالعات انجام شده در این زمینه استفاده از روش فراتحلیل برای دستیابی به نتیجه‌گیری کلی و بدون ابهام بسیار مفیدتر از انجام پژوهشی جداگانه می‌باشد.
روش‌شناسی پژوهش: برای دستیابی به هدف پژوهش با به‌کارگیری رویکرد لیپسی و ویلسون و همچنین، اجرای آزمون‌های Q کوکران و اگر تعداد 150 پژوهش (شامل 52 مقاله داخلی طی سال‌های 1371 تا 1401 و 98 مقاله خارجی طی سال‌های 1992 تا 2022) مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند. در این پژوهش‌ها، کیفیت حسابرسی به‌عنوان متغیر وابسته و ویژگی‌های مؤسسه حسابرسی به‌عنوان متغیرهای مستقل مطرح شده بودند.
یافته‌ها: نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که اندازه مؤسسه حسابرسی و ارائه خدمات غیر حسابرسی بر کیفیت حسابرسی تأثیر مثبت می‌گذارد و دوره تصدی حسابرس در صنعت بر کیفیت حسابرسی تأثیر منفی می‌گذارد. تخصص حسابرس در صنعت و کیفیت حسابرسی ارتباط معناداری با یکدیگر ندارند.
اصالت / ارزش‌افزوده علمی: این پژوهش با استفاده از روش فراتحلیل، نتایج متناقض پژوهش‌های پیشین در زمینه تأثیر ویژگی‌های مؤسسات حسابرسی بر کیفیت حسابرسی را تجمیع و تحلیل می‌کند و بدین ترتیب به ارائه یک دیدگاه جامع و روشن در این حوزه کمک می‌نماید.
Purpose: The purpose of the present study is to examine the effect of audit firm characteristics on audit quality using a meta-analysis approach. The significance and necessity of the topic have led to numerous studies in this area. Given the inconsistencies and contradictions among previous findings as well as the large body of research conducted, applying the meta-analysis method is considered far more useful than conducting a separate study, as it enables a comprehensive and unambiguous conclusion.
Methodology: To achieve the research objective, the Lipsey and Wilson approach was employed, along with Cochran’s Q test and Egger’s test. A total of 150 studies were reviewed, comprising 52 domestic articles published between 1992 and 2022 (1371–1401 in the Iranian calendar) and 98 international articles published between 1992 and 2022. In these studies, audit quality was treated as the dependent variable, while audit firm characteristics were considered as the independent variables.
Findings: The results indicate that audit firm size and the provision of non-audit services have a positive effect on audit quality, whereas auditor tenure in the industry has a negative impact on audit quality. Moreover, auditor industry specialization and audit quality were found to have no significant relationship.
Originality / Value: By employing the meta-analysis method, this study consolidates and analyzes the contradictory findings of prior research on the effects of audit firm characteristics on audit quality, thereby providing a comprehensive and clear perspective on this subject.
Al-Hajaya, K. (2019). The impact of audit committee effectiveness on audit quality: Evidence from the Middle East. International Review of Management and Marketing, 9(5), 1–8.
Ali, M. J., Singh, R. K. S., & Al-Akra, M. (2018). The impact of audit committee effectiveness on audit fees and non-audit service fees: Evidence from Australia. Accounting Research Journal, 31(2), 174-191.
Ashbaugh, H., LaFond, R., & Mayhew, B. W. (2003). Do nonaudit services compromise auditor independence? Further evidence. The accounting review, 78(3), 611-639.
Ashbaugh, H., LaFond, R., & Mayhew, B. W. (2003). Do nonaudit services compromise auditor independence? Further evidence. The accounting review, 78(3), 611-639.
Asiriuwa, O., Aronmwan, E. J., Uwuigbe, U., & Uwuigbe, O. R. (2018). Audit committee attributes and audit quality: A benchmark analysis. Business: Theory and Practice, 19, 37-48.
Balsam, S., Krishnan, J., & Yang, J. S. (2003). Auditor industry specialization and earnings quality. Auditing: A journal of practice & Theory, 22(2), 71-97.
Bigus, J. (2015). Auditor reputation under different negligence regimes. Abacus, 51(3), 356-378.
Comprix, J., & Huang, H. (2015). Does auditor size matter? Evidence from small audit firms. Advances in accounting, 31(1), 11-20.
Davidson, R. A., & Neu, D. (1993). A note on the association between audit firm size and audit quality. Contemporary accounting research, 9(2), 479-488.
DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of accounting and economics, 3(3), 183-199.
DeFond, M., & Zhang, J. (2014). A review of archival auditing research. Journal of accounting and economics, 58(2-3), 275-326.
Dunn, K. A., & Mayhew, B. W. (2004). Audit firm industry specialization and client disclosure quality. Review of accounting studies, 9, 35-58.
Elinda, A. I., Iswati, S., & Setiawan, P. (2019). Analysis of the influence of role stress on reduced audit quality. Jurnal Akuntansi, 23(2), 301-315.
Ettredge, M., Fuerherm, E. E., Guo, F., & Li, C. (2017). Client pressure and auditor independence: Evidence from the “Great Recession” of 2007–2009. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 36(4), 262-283.
geiger, m. a., & raghunandan, k. (2002). auditor tenure and audit reporting failures. auditing: a journal of practice & theory, 21(1), 67-78.
Ghezel Sofla, M., Bazrafshan, A., & Moradi, M. (2018). Effect of audit quality on differences between audited and unaudited financial statements. Financial Accounting Knowledge, 5(2), 111-130. [In Persian]
Guo, Q., Koch, C., & Zhu, A. (2022). The value of auditor industry specialization: Evidence from a structural model. The Accounting Review, 97(7), 193-222.
Hogan, C. E., & Jeter, D. C. (1999). Industry specialization by auditors. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18(1), 1-17.
Inaam, Z., & Khamoussi, H. (2016). Audit committee effectiveness, audit quality and earnings management: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Law and Management, 58(2), 179-196.
Jenkins, J. G., & Krawczyk, K. (2001). The influence of nonaudit services on perceptions of auditor independence. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 17(3).
Knechel, W. R. (2016). Audit quality and regulation. International Journal of Auditing, 20(3), 215-223.
Kusnadi, Y., Leong, K. S., Suwardy, T., & Wang, J. (2016). Audit committees and financial reporting quality in Singapore. Journal of business ethics, 139, 197-214.
Lam, S. S., & Chang, S. L. (1994). Auditor service quality and auditor size: evidence from initial public offerings in Singapore. Journal of international accounting, auditing and taxation, 3(1), 103-114.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. SAGE publications, Inc.
Mansourian, S., & Farhadtooski, O. (2021). Investigating the relationship between audit firm fees, audit firm credibility, and audit quality. In Seventh International Conference on Management, Accounting, and Economic Development. [In Persian]
Maranjory, M., & Rezvani, J. (2018). Meta-analysis in accounting research. Accounting and Social Benefits, 8(3), 125-147. [In Persian]
McKinley, S., Pany, K., & Reckers, P. M. (1985). An examination of the influence of CPA firm type, size, and MAS provision on loan officer decisions and perceptions. Journal of Accounting Research, 887-896.
Mustafa, A. S., Che-Ahmad, A., & Chandren, S. (2018). Board diversity, audit committee characteristics and audit quality: The moderating role of control-ownership wedge. Business and Economic Horizons, 14(3), 587-614.
Palmrose, Z. V. (1988). 1987 competitive manuscript co-winner: An analysis of auditor litigation and audit service quality. Accounting review, 55-73.
Patel, c., & Psaros, j. (2000). Perceptions of external auditors’independence: some cross-cultural evidence. The British Accounting Review, 32(3), 311-338.
Seckler, C., Gronewold, U., & Reihlen, M. (2017). An error management perspective on audit quality: Toward a multi-level model. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 62, 21-42.
Simunic, D. A., Ye, M., & Zhang, P. (2017). The joint effects of multiple legal system characteristics on auditing standards and auditor behavior. Contemporary accounting research, 34(1), 7-38.
Sofia, P., & Avianti, I. (2019). Influence of internal control activities and characteristics of audit committee on the quality of audit implementation by a public accounting firm. Jurnal Akuntansi, 23(1), 97-112.
Sukma, P., & Bernawati, Y. (2019). The Impact of audit committe characteristics on audit quality. Jurnal Akuntansi, 23(3), 363-378.
Titman, S., & Trueman, B. (1986). Information quality and the valuation of new issues. Journal of accounting and economics, 8(2), 159-172.
Zaman, M., Hudaib, M., & Haniffa, R. (2011). Corporate governance quality, audit fees and non‐audit services fees. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 38(1‐2), 165-197.
Zare Bahnamiri, M. J., & Hasankhani, F. (2021). Auditor Characteristics and Audit Report Lag: A Meta-Analysis. Accounting and Auditing Review, 28(4), 664-690. [In Persian]