A Matter of Appearances: How Does Auditing Expertise Benefit Audit Committees When Selecting Auditors?†‡

被引:13
作者
Baugh, Matthew [1 ]
Hallman, Nicholas J. [2 ]
Kachelmeier, Steven J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
[2] Univ Texas Austin, Austin, TX 78712 USA
关键词
audit committees; expertise; attractiveness; dual-processing theory; elaboration likelihood model; auditor selection; PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS; BEAUTY; SIZE; DETERMINANTS; REPUTATIONS; INFERENCES; KNOWLEDGE; FEES;
D O I
10.1111/1911-3846.12736
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Literature to date reveals relatively little about the role of expertise in auditor selection beyond basic preferences for Big 4 and industry specialist auditors. We hypothesize that audit committees whose members have no Big 4 auditing experience are likely to struggle when interviewing prospective Big 4 partners, leading such committees to draw on superficial, heuristic cues in lieu of conducting more substantive evaluations. To test this prediction, we obtain independent ratings of the facial attractiveness of audit partners identified from Form AP filings recently mandated by the US PCAOB. Our primary finding is that audit committees with no Big 4-experienced members are more likely to favor partners whose photographs raters view to be highly attractive. We characterize attractiveness as a superficial attribute for auditor selection because we detect no relation between attractiveness and accruals- or restatement-based measures of financial reporting quality for audit committees with one or more Big 4-experienced members. We do find an inverse association between attractiveness and financial reporting quality for committees without this experience, likely reflecting the statistical implication of a selection bias. We conclude that auditing expertise mitigates the influence of superficial considerations in auditor selection, enabling audit committees to fulfill their stewardship role more effectively.
引用
收藏
页码:234 / 270
页数:37
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Auditor selection and audit committee characteristics
    Abbott, LJ
    Parker, S
    [J]. AUDITING-A JOURNAL OF PRACTICE & THEORY, 2000, 19 (02): : 47 - 66
  • [2] What Drives Auditor Selection?
    Almer, Elizabeth Dreike
    Philbrick, Donna R.
    Rupley, Kathleen Hertz
    [J]. CURRENT ISSUES IN AUDITING, 2014, 8 (01): : A26 - A42
  • [3] Do practitioner assessments agree with academic proxies for audit quality? Evidence from PCAOB and internal inspections
    Aobdia, Daniel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING & ECONOMICS, 2019, 67 (01) : 144 - 174
  • [4] Audit committee financial expertise and earnings management: The role of status
    Badolato, Patrick G.
    Donelson, Dain C.
    Ege, Matthew
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING & ECONOMICS, 2014, 58 (2-3) : 208 - 230
  • [5] The Audit Committee Oversight Process
    Beasley, Mark S.
    Carcello, Joseph V.
    Hermanson, Dana R.
    Neal, Terry L.
    [J]. CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 2009, 26 (01) : 65 - +
  • [6] Beauty, productivity, and discrimination: Lawyers' looks and lucre
    Biddle, JE
    Hamermesh, DS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LABOR ECONOMICS, 1998, 16 (01) : 172 - 201
  • [7] Perceptions and Price: Evidence from CEO Presentations at IPO Roadshows
    Blankespoor, Elizabeth
    Hendricks, Bradley E.
    Miller, Gregory S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 2017, 55 (02) : 275 - 327
  • [8] Multidimensional homophily in friendship networks
    Block, Per
    Grund, Thomas
    [J]. NETWORK SCIENCE, 2014, 2 (02) : 189 - 212
  • [9] Bonner S.E., 2008, Judgment and Decision Making in Accounting
  • [10] Bonner S.E., 1999, Accounting Horizons, V13, P385, DOI DOI 10.2308/ACCH.1999.13.4.385