Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between nonaudit services (NAS) and out-of-period adjustments (OOPAs). Over the years, the number of OOPAs has risen while the number of restatements has decreased. This could indicate an improvement in financial reporting quality. It could also indicate the use of a type of stealth restatement for opportunistic purposes. These less prominent restatements are more likely to go undetected and could perpetuate opportunistic disclosure and mitigate the likelihood of unfavorable market reactions.

The authors use a two-stage multivariate regression analysis to examine the relationship between NAS and the reporting of an OOPA. The authors use prior research on NAS to guide the model development. The authors perform several robustness checks including different types of NAS and different characteristics of OOPAs.

The results indicate that NAS has a significantly negative association with the existence of OOPAs. The core findings suggest that NAS does not impair auditor independence. Rather, greater amounts of NAS may contribute to knowledge spillover, which leads to higher financial reporting and audit quality. The results are robust to several additional tests.

The results raise interesting implications for regulators, executives, auditors, investors and future research. The authors provide insight into the relationship between NAS and auditor independence.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, prior research has not considered the effect of NAS on OOPAs. The authors contribute to the literature by providing evidence that OOPAs, a form of stealth restatements, is an important consideration in audit quality research.

This study aims to examine the literature from the Web of Science database published on board committees between 2002 and 2023 and outline the quantitative summary, journey of board committees’ research and suggest future research directions.

This study examines bibliometric-content analysis combined with a systematic literature review of articles on board committees to document the summary of the field. The authors used co-citation, co-occurrence and cluster analysis under bibliometric-content analysis to present the field summary.

Board committee composition, such as their gender, independence and expertise, as well as factors affecting corporate governance, such as reporting quality, earnings management and board monitoring, all have a significant impact on board committee literature. The field is getting growing attention from authors, journals and countries. Nevertheless, there is a need for further exploration in areas like expertise, member age and tenure, the economic crisis and the nomination and remuneration committee, which have not yet received sufficient attention.

This paper has both theoretical and practical contributions. From a theoretical perspective, this study substantiates the prevalence of agency theory within board committee literature, reinforcing the foundational role of agency theory in shaping discussions about board committees. On practical ground, the comprehensive overview of board committee literature offers scholars a road map for navigating this field and directing their future research journey. The identification of research gaps in certain areas serves as a catalyst for scholars to explore untapped dimensions, enabling them to strengthen the essence of the committees’ performance.