Are workpaper reviews preparer-specific?

John T. Sweeney, Ik Seon Suh, Kenneth C. Dalton and Sylvia Meljem

The British Accounting Review, 2017, vol. 49, issue 6, 560-577

Abstract: We investigate the potential for preparer specific performance dimensions to influence workpaper reviewer's judgments and actions. In a 2 × 2 experimental design, we manipulate two factors: 1) the amount of time, relative to the budgeted hours, expended by the preparer to complete the workpaper, and 2) preparer interpersonal behaviors during the course of the audit. The participants in our sample consist of 138 Mexican audit managers and seniors representing all four Big 4 public accounting firms. Although the participants reviewed an identical workpaper, the results of our experiment reveal that reviewers wrote significantly fewer(more) review comments and judged it to be of higher(lower) quality when the preparer completed the workpaper under(over) the budgeted time or when the preparer demonstrated good(poor) interpersonal behaviors.

Keywords: Audit workpaper review; Input bias; Interpersonal performance; Audit quality (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890838917300537
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:bracre:v:49:y:2017:i:6:p:560-577

DOI: 10.1016/j.bar.2017.09.003

Access Statistics for this article

The British Accounting Review is currently edited by Nathan Lael Joseph and Alan Lowe

More articles in The British Accounting Review from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().