The DOI matches its Crossref record; 102 of the 102 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Auditor Independence and Audit Quality: A Literature Review
Abstract
This article presents a comprehensive review of academic research pertaining to auditor independence and audit quality. This literature review is conducted based on published articles during the period 1976-2013 in nine leading journals related to auditing. We organize our review around four main threats to auditor independence, namely, (a) client importance, (b) non-audit services, (c) auditor tenure, and (d) client affiliation with audit firms. For each of the threats, we discuss findings related to the incentives, perceptions, and behaviors of the auditor and the client, as well as the effects of each threat on the actual and perceived quality of audits and financial reports. We conclude that the mixed evidence, together with recent regulatory changes, provides opportunities for future research on auditor independence and audit quality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Auditor size and audit quality
DeAngelo, L. E. (1981) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1 · Cited by 5,813
Journal of Accounting Literature
(2023) · Journal of Accounting Literature · doi:10.1108/jal · Cited by 1,968
Auditor independence, ‘low balling’, and disclosure regulation
DeAngelo, L. E. (1981) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/0165-4101(81)90009-4 · Cited by 1,695
The Relation between Auditors' Fees for Nonaudit Services and Earnings Management
Frankel, R. M., Johnson, M. F., & Nelson, K. K. (2002) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2002.77.s-1.71 · Cited by 1,648
Myers, J. N., Myers, L. A., & Omer, T. C. (2003) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2003.78.3.779 · Cited by 1,492
Do Nonaudit Services Compromise Auditor Independence? Further Evidence
Ashbaugh, H., LaFond, R., & Mayhew, B. W. (2003) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2003.78.3.611 · Cited by 1,466
Do Non–Audit Service Fees Impair Auditor Independence? Evidence from Going Concern Audit Opinions
DeFond, M. L., Raghunandan, K., & Subramanyam, K. R. (2002) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1475-679x.00088 · Cited by 1,351
What do we know about audit quality?
Francis, J. R. (2004) · The British Accounting Review · doi:10.1016/j.bar.2004.09.003 · Cited by 1,271
Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions
Reynolds, J. K., & Francis, J. R. (2000) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/s0165-4101(01)00010-6 · Cited by 1,191
Audit‐Firm Tenure and the Quality of Financial Reports*
Johnson, E., Khurana, I. K., & Reynolds, J. K. (2002) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1506/llth-jxqv-8cew-8mxd · Cited by 1,066
Cited by
Auditing Work: Exploring the New York City algorithmic bias audit regime
Groves, L., Metcalf, J., Kennedy, A., Vecchione, B., & Strait, A. (2024) · The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3630106.3658959 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Tepalagul, N., & Lin, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-08-04
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 101-121
- ISSN
- 0148-558X (ISSN-L)
- 2160-4061
- OpenAlex
- W2133004780
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 102
- FWCI
- 55.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Auditor Independence and Audit Quality: A Literature Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0148558x14544505
- The paper
- Tepalagul, N., & Lin, L. (2015). Auditor Independence and Audit Quality: A Literature Review. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558x14544505
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
