The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do Individual Auditors Affect Audit Quality? Evidence from Archival Data
Open accessAbstract
We examine whether and how individual auditors affect audit outcomes using a large set of archival Chinese data. We analyze approximately 800 individual auditors and find that they exhibit significant variation in audit quality. The effects that individual auditors have on audit quality are both economically and statistically significant, and are pronounced in both large and small audit firms. We also find that the individual auditor effects on audit quality can be partially explained by auditor characteristics, such as educational background, Big N audit firm experience, rank in the audit firm, and political affiliation. Our findings highlight the importance of scrutinizing and understanding audit quality at the individual auditor level. Data Availability: Data used in this study are publicly available from the sources described herein.
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
1 retracted
The Impact of Client and Auditor Gender on Auditors’ Judgments (Retracted)
Nöteberg, A., Hunton, J. E., & Gomaa, M. I. (2009) · Accounting Horizons · doi:10.2308/acch.2009.23.1.1 · Cited by 114
RetractedNewey, W. K., & West, K. D. (1987) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913610 · Cited by 16,936
Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach
Wooldridge, J. M. (1999) · Cited by 14,346
Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests
Fama, E. F., & MacBeth, J. D. (1973) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/260061 · Cited by 14,258
Earnings Management During Import Relief Investigations
Jones, J. J. (1991) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.2307/2491047 · Cited by 8,353
Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2005) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511811241 · Cited by 8,092
Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-Nested Hypotheses
Vuong, Q. H. (1989) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912557 · Cited by 5,929
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
The Quality of Accruals and Earnings: The Role of Accrual Estimation Errors
Dechow, P. M., & Dichev, I. D. (2002) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2002.77.s-1.35 · Cited by 5,152
Understanding earnings quality: A review of the proxies, their determinants and their consequences
Dechow, P., Ge, W., & Schrand, C. (2010) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.09.001 · Cited by 4,159
Cited by
A review of archival auditing research
DeFond, M., & Zhang, J. (2014) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.09.002 · Cited by 3,188
Do school ties between auditors and client executives influence audit outcomes?
Guan, Y., Su, L. (., Wu, D., & Yang, Z. (2016) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.09.003 · Cited by 412
Self-citationAobdia, D. (2019) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2018.09.001 · Cited by 373
Metadata
- Authors
- Gul, F. A., Wu, D., & Yang, Z.
- Venue
- The Accounting Review
- Publisher
- American Accounting Association
- Published
- 2013-06-01
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1993-2023
- ISSN
- 0001-4826 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-7967
- OpenAlex
- W2974495098
- Cited by
- 772
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 111.96
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do Individual Auditors Affect Audit Quality? Evidence from Archival Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/accr-50536
- The paper
- Gul, F. A., Wu, D., & Yang, Z. (2013). Do Individual Auditors Affect Audit Quality? Evidence from Archival Data. The Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50536
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.
