Search results

In light of the threat posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, Chinese authorities have called for the adoption of the individual dining style (IDS) as a preventive measure for the pandemic and a new norm for civilized code of conduct. Accordingly, this study aims to investigate the factors influencing the Chinese people’s intention to adopt the IDS.

The authors applied the capability, opportunity and motivation model of behavior (COM-B) and identified potential predictors influencing the intention to adopt the IDS through a review of the literature. Data were collected through an online survey, and structural equation modeling was applied to test the hypotheses.

The results indicated that the most influential predictors were subjective norm, social norm, perceived benefit and past behavior, while the other predictors (including breaking habits, communal dining culture, perceived behavioral control, perceived health risk and social risk) had insignificant effects on the intention to adopt IDS.

First, educational public health messages should communicate the benefits of IDS. Second, persuasive public communication should focus on how people are implementing the target behavior rather than drawing attention to a minority who are disregarding it. Moreover, given the highly significant effects of subjective norm, public health campaigns should emphasize that adoption of the desired behavior expresses care for significant others.

The findings advance understanding of an underexplored topic, namely, how deeply ingrained ways of dining may be transformed in the current context. Applying the COM-B, the authors tested multiple variables to explain the intention to adopt IDS. The results suggest that some social influences (subjective norm and social norm) and reflective cognitive processes (perceived benefit) had the greatest impacts on behavior intentions. Moreover, the results indicate that threat of COVID-19 may not prompt people to change their dining styles. However, the benefits of IDS to prevent the spread of infectious diseases could lead to its wider adoption.

This paper aims to address the robust controller design problem for a class of fuzzy C-means clustering algorithm that is robust against both the plant parameter perturbations and controller gain variations. Based on Takagi–Sugeno (T-S) fuzzy model description, the stability and control problems of nonlinear systems are studied.

A recently proposed integral inequality is selected based on the free-weight matrix, and the less conservative stability criterion is given in the form of linear matrix inequalities (LMIs).

Under the premise that the controller and the system share the same, the method does not require the number of membership functions and rules.

Furthermore, the modified controller in a large-scale nonlinear system is utilized as a stability criterion for a closed-loop T-S fuzzy system obtained by LMI, and is rearranged by a machine learning membership function.

The closed-loop controller criterion is derived by energy functions to guarantee the stability of systems. Finally, an example is given to demonstrate the results.

This study aims to address the following four research questions: first, whether auditors report critical audit matters (CAMs) to shield themselves against possible litigation; second, whether reporting quality affects auditors’ propensity to report CAMs; third, whether auditors’ tenure length – reflecting familiarity with clients’ financial reporting – affects their likelihood to report CAMs; and fourth, whether auditors’ conservatism increases the likelihood of CAMs reporting.

Data are manually collected from audit reports including CAMs in 10-K, then financial data are collected from the Capital IQ database, and market data are collected from the CRSP database. Using propensity score matching, the initial sample of companies with CAMs is matched with companies without reported CAMs. Performance adjusted discretionary accruals, real earnings management proxy, Khan and Watts’ (2009) C-score, propensity to issue a going concern opinion, Dechow et al.’s (2011) F-Score, Rogers and Stocken’s (2005) model and Houston et al.’s (2010) model are used to measure reporting quality, auditor conservatism, misstatement risk and litigation risk, respectively.

The results do not show that auditors report CAMs opportunistically to shield themselves from litigation risk. However, the results do suggest that auditors have a greater tendency to report CAMs when reporting quality is low and when they are more conservative. On the other hand, they have less tendency to report CAMs in their first year of engagement.

The findings of this study have important implications for the auditor behavior literature as it shows that, when it comes to reporting CAMs, auditors actually behave objectively and do not report in a trite way. This study also provides early archival evidence on a standard that relates to the first major change to the auditor’s report in decades. To the best of the author’s knowledge, it is the first to provide evidence on the association between auditor conservatism and auditors tendency to report CAMs and the first to triangulate prior research on auditor litigation risk by providing the first archival evidence on the auditors “litigation-shielding” concern.

This study examines whether auditors attempt to meet the stated objective of reporting CAMs by signaling information about reporting quality. This study demonstrates that reporting CAMs is not a “boilerplate” communication. This study has implications for standards setters, as it shows that CAMs are reported in a way consistent with the objectives of the new standard, namely, via signaling information in the audit report on the quality of the financial statements.

In terms of originality, this paper uses a manually collected sample and, to the best of the author’s knowledge, is the first to focus on auditor’s behavior rather than on investors or clients reactions to CAMs. Also, this paper addresses a recently issued standard using US data and archival approach, rather than experimental. This paper also provides relevant evidence related to concerns raised earlier but were not empirically examined, such as reporting CAMS as “boilerplate” expectations. This paper provides new evidence on the auditors’ behavior with regard to litigation risk.