[-] Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorFrancis, Jere R.eng
dc.contributor.authorYu, Dong Michael, 1968-eng
dc.coverage.spatialUnited Stateseng
dc.date.issued2007eng
dc.date.submitted2007 Springeng
dc.descriptionThe entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file.eng
dc.descriptionTitle from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on October 15, 2007)eng
dc.descriptionVita.eng
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.) University of Missouri-Columbia 2007.eng
dc.description.abstractLarger offices of Big Four accounting firms are argued to provide higher quality audits than smaller offices due to greater in-house experience and more expertise in ministering the audits of publicly listed clients. In addition, larger offices are less likely to have independent cerelated problems since an individual client is relatively less important due to larger client bases in bigger offices. My conjecture is tested for a sample of 6,568 firm-year observations for the period 2003 to 2005 that are audited by 285 unique offices of the Big Four accounting firms in the United States. The results are consistent with larger offices providing higher quality audits. Specifically, clients in larger offices evidence less earnings management (smaller abnormal accruals and less earnings benchmark beating behavior). Auditors in larger offices are also more likely to issue going concern audit reports, ceteris paribus. These results hold after controlling for industry leadership by individual accounting firms and specific offices, and the effects of both absolute client size and relative client size (i.e., client size relative to office size). Importantly, the results are robust to partitioning the sample into upper and lower halves of client size, which indicates the results are not driven by large clients (who may have inherently higher quality earnings). While accounting firms have incentives to provide uniform quality across all practice offices, particularly in the post-SOX era with PCAOB inspections, my results indicate that there are frictions in the ability of firms to accomplish this through their existing knowledge sharing practices and quality control procedures.eng
dc.description.bibrefIncludes bibliographical references.eng
dc.identifier.merlinb60594639eng
dc.identifier.oclc174963899eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.32469/10355/4827eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10355/4827
dc.languageEnglisheng
dc.publisherUniversity of Missouri--Columbiaeng
dc.relation.ispartofcommunityUniversity of Missouri--Columbia. Graduate School. Theses and Dissertationseng
dc.rightsOpenAccess.eng
dc.rights.licenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.
dc.subject.lcshAuditingeng
dc.subject.lcshAccounting firmseng
dc.titleThe effect of big four office size on audit qualityeng
dc.typeThesiseng
thesis.degree.disciplineAccountancy (MU)eng
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Missouri--Columbiaeng
thesis.degree.levelDoctoraleng
thesis.degree.namePh. D.eng


Files in this item

[PDF]
[PDF]
[PDF]

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

[-] Show simple item record