Commentary on “The effect of an audit judgment rule on audit committee members’ professional skepticism: The case of accounting estimates” (Kang, Trotman, and Trotman)

Sandra C. Vera-Muñoz

Accounting, Organizations and Society, 2015, vol. 46, issue C, 77-80

Abstract: These discussant comments address the Kang, Trotman, and Trotman study on whether introducing an audit judgment rule – which is analogous to the business judgment rule applied to corporate officers and directors – and deploying innovative audit procedures affect audit committee members’ questioning on accounting estimates. I believe that the authors have identified a very relevant and timely topic for analysis. In addition, the authors have done a good job motivating the importance of the topic given the increasingly regulated post-Sarbanes-Oxley environment. In these comments, I attempt to place the Kang, Trotman, and Trotman study into context and facilitate generation of research ideas by others. My comments are divided into three sections: introduction, the evolving roles and responsibilities of audit committees and independent auditors, and comments on research design and some directions for future research.

Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368215000458
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:46:y:2015:i:c:p:77-80

DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2015.04.002

Access Statistics for this article

Accounting, Organizations and Society is currently edited by Christopher Chapman

More articles in Accounting, Organizations and Society from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().