Audit Quality, Auditor's Follow-up Recommendations (Emphasis on Specific Point Paragraph) and Auditor's Opinion

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

• Arezoo Aghaei Chadegani
• Lotfolah Yadollahy Farsani

Department of Accounting, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

10.22067/ijaaf.v3i3.89213

Abstract

Considering the importance of the audit objective, which creates reasonable assurance about the financial statements and the importance of the audit process to collect sufficient and adequate audit evidence, the audit quality is considered one of the audit process's main features. Therefore, to improve the audit and review process quality, there is a need for a framework for judging. Using the financial data of 114 companies from different industries from 2012 to 2017, this study analyzes the relationship between audit quality and auditor's follow-up recommendations (emphasis on specific point paragraph) and the relationship between auditors' follow-up recommendations (emphasis on specific point paragraph) and auditors' opinions. The results show that there is a meaningful relationship between the audit quality and the auditors' follow-up recommendations (emphasis on specific point paragraph); this shows that the auditors' greater accuracy and their control on processing financial information provide better and more accurate points on the quality improvement of financial statement reports. Moreover, the results show no significant relationship between auditors' follow-up recommendations (emphasis on specific point paragraphs) and the type of auditor's opinion in the years to come.

Keywords

• Audit Quality
• Auditor's follow-up recommendations
• Emphasis on specific point paragraph
• Auditor's opinion

---

References

Azad, A. and Kazemi, M. (2013). “Audit report about financial statements”. Audit Organization Publication, number 12. Tehran.

 

Cameran, M., Di Vincenzo, D., and Merlotti, E. (2018). "The audit firm rotation rule: A review of the literature", SDA Bocconi Research Paper.

 

Chen, J and Dong, W. and Zhang, Y. (2016). “Perceived audit quality, state ownership, and stock price delay: evidence from China”. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16081625.2016.1208573.

 

DeAngelo, L. (1981). “Auditor Size and Audit Quality”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 13: 183-189.

Francis J.R. (2011). “A Framework for Understanding and Researching Audit Quality”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(2), 125-152.

 

Gaynor, K., Griffin, A., and David H. Lont. (2016). “Audit fees around dismissals and resignations: Additional evidence”. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 7, 65–81.

Hassas Yeganeh, Y. (2015). “Audit Philosophy”. Scientific and Cultural publication, Tehran.

 

Lopez, D. M., and Peters, G. F. (2012). “The effect of workload compression on audit quality”. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 31(4), 139-165.

 

Nikbakht, M., Shabanzadeh, M., and A, Kenarkar. (2016). “The relationship between audit fee, auditor experience and audit quality”. Management and accounting research journal, 2(1), 190-208.

 

Pereira, A. N. (2009). “Corporate Governance and Quality of Accounting Information: The Relation of Content and Logic between Fiscal Board and Auditor Opinion in Brazilian Companies Listed at BOVESPA”. Financial Analysis Journal, 60, 33-43.

 

Poorheidari, O., Borhaninejad, S., and V, Mohamadrezakhani. (2017). “The effect of audit quality on audit report timeliness among companies listed on Tehran Stock Exchange”. Auditing Knowledge Journal, 58, 85-104.

 

Setyaningrum, D., Gani, L., Martani, D.andKuntadi, C. (2017). “The Effect of Auditor Quality on The Follow-Up of Audit Recommendation”. International Research Journal of Business Studies,6(2), 89-104.

 

Watkins, A. L., Hillison, W., & Morecroft, S. E. (2004). “Audit quality: a synthesis of theory and empirical evidence”. Journal of Accounting Literature, 23(1).