Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 369

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Auditor Style and Financial Statement Comparability

Open access
Francis, Jere R., Pinnuck, Matt, Watanabe, Olena·2013·SSRN Electronic Journal
DOI 10.2139/ssrn.2287631
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ABSTRACT The term “audit style” is used to characterize the unique set of internal working rules of each Big 4 audit firm for the implementation of auditing standards and the enforcement of GAAP within their clienteles. Audit style implies that two companies audited by the same Big 4 auditor, subject to the same audit style, are more likely to have comparable earnings than two firms audited by two different Big 4 firms with different styles. By comparable we mean that two firms in the same industry and year will have a more similar accruals and earnings structure. For a sample of U.S. companies for the period 1987 to 2011, we find evidence consistent with audit style increasing the comparability of reported earnings within a Big 4 auditor's clientele. Data Availability: All data are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.2287631

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 369

Metadata

Authors
Francis, J. R., Pinnuck, M., & Watanabe, O.
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013
Volume
89
Issue
2
Pages
605-633
ISSN
  • 0001-4826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-5068
DOI
10.2139/ssrn.2287631
OpenAlex
W3123539696
Cited by
369
References
60
FWCI
40.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.