Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Technological Educational Institution of Thessaloniki

2014

Abstract

Auditor selection can be regarded as a matter of audit quality. Research studies aiming to model the auditor choice employ statistical techniques. Here we employ three techniques derived from the Data Mining domain to build models capable of discriminating cases where companies choose a Big 4 or a Non-Big 4 auditor. Significant factors associated with the auditor choice are revealed. The three models are compared in terms of their performances. According to 10-fold cross validation bagging increases significantly the performance of one classifier.

References (23)

  1. Bartov E., Gul F.A., Tsui J.S.L. (2001), Discretionary-accruals models and audit qualifications, Journal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 30, pp. 421-52.
  2. Becker C.L., DeFond M.L., Jiambalvo J., Subramanyam K.R. (1998), The effect of audit quality on earnings management, Contemporary Accounting Research, vol. 15, pp. 1-24.
  3. Breiman L. (1996), Bagging Predictors, Machine Learning, vol. 24, pp. 123-140.
  4. Chaney P., Jeter D., Shivakumar L. (1996), Self selection of auditors and audit pricing in private firms, The Accounting Review, vol. 79, pp. 51-72.
  5. Chow C., Rice S. (1982), Notes: Qualified audit opinions and auditor switching, The Accounting Review, vol. 27, pp. 326-335.
  6. Citron D., Manalis G. (2001), The international firms as new entrants to the statutory audit market: an empirical analysis of auditor selection in Greece, 1993 to 1997, The European Accounting Review, vol. 10 pp. 439-459.
  7. Citron D., Taffler R. (1992), The audit report under going concern uncertainties: an empirical analysis, Accounting and Business Research, vol. 22, pp. 337-345.
  8. Craswell A., Stokes D.J., Laughton J. (2002), Auditor independence and fee dependence, Journal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 33, pp. 253-275.
  9. DeAngelo L. (1981), Auditor size and auditor quality, Journal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 1, pp. 113-127.
  10. DeFond M. (1992), The association between changes in client firm agency costs and auditor switching, Audit: a Journal of Practice and Theory, vol. 11, pp. 16-31.
  11. Firth M. (2002), Auditor-provided consultancy services and their associations with audit fees and audit opinions, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, vol. 29, pp. 661-693.
  12. Han J., Camber M, (2006), Data Mining Concepts and Techniques, Morgan Kaufman, 2 nd edition, San Diego, USA.
  13. Icerman R., Hillison W. (1991), Disposition of auditor-detected errors: some evidence on evaluative materiality, Audit a Journal of Practice and Theory, vol. 10, pp. 22-34.
  14. Johnson B., Lys T. (1990), The market of auditor services -Evidence from voluntary auditor changes, Journal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 12, pp. 281-308.
  15. Kane G., Velury U. (2004), The role of institutional ownership in the market for auditing services: an empirical investigation, Journal of Business Research, vol. 57, pp. 976-983.
  16. Kirkos E., Spathis C., Manolopoulos Y. (2007), Data mining techniques for the detection of fraudulent financial statements, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 32, pp. 995-1003.
  17. Krishnan J., Krishnan J. and Stephens R. (1996), The simultaneous relation between auditor switching and audit opinion: An empirical analysis, Accounting and Business Research, vol. 26, pp. 224-236.
  18. Mutchler J. (1986), Empirical evidence regarding the auditor's going-concern opinion decision, Auditing: a Journal of Practice & Theory, vol. 6, pp. 148-163.
  19. Palmrose Z. (1988), An analysis of auditors litigation and audit service quality, The Accounting Review, vol. 63, pp. 55-73.
  20. Rakotomalala R. (2005), TANAGRA un logiciel gratuit pour l'enseignement et la recherché, in Actes de EGC'2005, RNTI-E-3 2, pp. 697-702.
  21. Teoh SH, Wong TJ. (1993), Perceived auditor quality and the earnings response coefficient, The Accounting Review, vol. 68, pp. 346-366.
  22. Velury U., Reish J., O'Reilly D. (2003), Institutional ownership and the selection of industry specialist auditors, Review of Qualitative Finance and Accounting, vol. 21, pp. 35-48.
  23. Wilson R., Martinez T. (1997), Improved heterogeneous distance functions, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 6, pp. 1-34.