Search results

Researchers and practitioners have long debated the arguments in favor of and against providing specific mathematical materiality guidelines in auditing standards. Yet, there is little empirical evidence about the relationship between materiality thresholds and audit risk judgments in the absence of such guidelines. In this study, 152 Big Six managers evaluated materiality and risk for an audit simulation based on an actual case where material fraud was undetected. The auditor subjects were allowed to choose the evidence they would examine before reaching a decision. The major findings of the study are that while auditor materiality judgments differ, these differences were not statistically significantly related to either fraud risk judgments or the amount of evidence the auditors chose to examine before rendering their judgments. This empirical evidence does not support the need for specific quantitative guidance in accounting standards related to materiality. However, other considerations (such as concern for legal liability) could also have an impact on the advisability of providing specific quantitative guidance for setting materiality thresholds.

Previous research on auditors’ processing of nondiagnostic evidence demonstrates the existence of a dilution effect – the tendency to underreact to diagnostic information when accompanied by nondiagnostic information. Prior audit studies find that accountability, a prominent feature in audit settings, does not affect the magnitude of the dilution effect exhibited by auditors. Based on more recent theories about accountability, this line of research is extended by exploring whether (1) the dilution effect previously identified is a robust phenomenon that can be replicated, (2) accountability has an impact on both the frequency and magnitude of dilution effect, and (3) the impact of accountability on both the frequency and magnitude of dilution effect is conditional on the degree of accountability experienced by the participants through various reporting levels. The experimental results from a sample of internal auditors provide evidence supporting the first two propositions; however, the results related to reporting levels are not significant. A discussion of the implications of these findings for audit research and practice follows.

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

This study provides evidence that auditors analyzing board composition in terms of the percentage of internal directors should concurrently consider the presence of a nominating committee and management ownership, since the latter is a substitute for each of the other characteristics. Decision support tools should incorporate the alternative nature of these traits, as well as the positive relation of chairman/CEO duality, subsidiary CEO board membership, the proportion of other CEOs on a board, and institutional ownership to both accounting and market performance measures. A disproportionate share of the board as key executives of the auditee is associated with poorer performance. Since inherent risk of going concern relates to performance and such risk has implications for management control structure, auditors could improve risk assessments by considering the relative weights of corporate governance traits' association with performance. The linkage of these findings with prior literature, the use of checklists, and further research is discussed.

This research is a 6-year extension of Bernardi's (2005) initial ranking of the top ethics authors in accounting; it also represents a broadening of the scope of the original data into accounting's top-40 journals. While Bernardi only considered publications in business-ethics journals in his initial ranking, we developed a methodology to identify ethics articles in accounting's top-40 journals. The purpose of this research is to provide a more complete list of accounting's ethics authors for use by authors, administrators, and other stakeholders. In this study, 26 business-ethics and accounting's top-40 journals were analyzed for a 23-year period between 1986 through 2008. Our data indicate that 16.8 percent of the 4,680 colleagues with either a PhD or DBA who teach accounting at North American institutions had authored/coauthored one ethics article and only 6.3 percent had authored/coauthored more than one ethics article in the 66 journals we examined. Consequently, 83.2 percent of the PhDs and DBAs in accounting had not authored/coauthored even one ethics article.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the “active ingredients” of integrated behavioral health care (IBHC) from the perspective of Karen refugee participants in an IBHC intervention.

This paper is based on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with participants (n=40) who have received an IBHC intervention for one year. These qualitative data are supplemented by descriptive quantitative data from those same participants.

This research suggested that IBHC increased awareness and access to behavioral health services, and that IBHC may be especially amenable to treating complex health conditions. The research also found that IBHC provided a point of regular contact for patients who had limited time with their primary care providers, which helped to enhance access to and engagement with health care.

IBHC has the potential to meet the complex needs of Karen resettled refugees living in an urban setting in the USA.

IBHC is a promising approach to help meet the mental health needs of refugees in the USA. There are, however, gaps in knowledge about the “active ingredients” of IBHC. This paper helps fill these gaps by studying how IBHC works from the perspective of a group of Karen refugees; these are critical perspectives, missing in the literature, which must be heard in order to better address the complex conditions and needs of resettled refugees.

This paper explores the value of financial statement auditing in the public sector. The study applies theory about auditing from the private sector as well as the public sector to explore ways in which public sector auditing can be expected to be valuable. It shows that there are a number of complementary explanations that can be applied to examine the value of public audit, including agency, signaling, insurance, management control, governance and confirmation explanations. The evidence from research and history is generally consistent with the agency and management control explanations. There is some support for the signaling and insurance explanations, while research evidence suggests that governance has differing impact in the public sector compared to the private. The confirmation hypothesis is also potentially relevant. Reviewing the history of the development of public sector auditing functions shows that at least some developments were consistent with explanations such as agency theory and management control. Auditing in the public sector is an area where more research is valuable. The paper concludes with a discussion of issues for further investigation.

This paper applies a stakeholder salience theoretical framework to facilitate the understanding of the roles salient stakeholders can have in the integration of education for sustainable development, one of the important Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), into Jordan’s university accounting education.

We used stakeholder salience theory to inform our study. This study adopted a qualitative research method. The study used semi-structured interviews to collect qualitative, open-ended data that explored the salient stakeholders’ thoughts, beliefs and feelings about their roles in influencing the integration of education for sustainable development into the Jordanian accounting curriculum.

The results indicate that education for sustainable development in accounting is important; however, most Jordanian salient stakeholders indicate their inability to integrate sustainable education into the accounting curriculum due to their lack of power to do so. The findings show that there is currently an inappropriate distribution of power, legitimacy and urgency amongst the salient stakeholders, who indicate that a progressive education solution is required in the critical area of education for sustainable development in accounting. This research indicates that a significant number of salient stakeholders would like the Jordanian government to provide power, legitimacy and urgency to enable accounting educators to become definite stakeholders as this will enable them to integrate sustainable education into the accounting curriculum.

The study is limited to Jordan only. The paper draws attention to the need for an appropriate distribution of power, legitimacy and urgency amongst salient stakeholders in Jordan.

This paper provides evidence that the salient stakeholders in this emerging economy want to make changes in their education system to address climate change concerns, an important SDG, through a better education curriculum for sustainable development in Jordanian universities.

Accounting educators should be given the power to make changes in the accounting curriculum, such as integrating education for sustainable development.

There is an inappropriate distribution of power, legitimacy and urgency amongst the Jordanian salient stakeholders and this imbalance hinders the integration of education for sustainable development into the accounting curriculum.