Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 924

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Audit Committee Composition and Auditor Reporting

Open access
Carcello, Joseph V., Neal, Terry L.·2000·The Accounting Review

Abstract

This study examines the relation between the composition of financially distressed firms' audit committees and the likelihood of receiving going-concern reports. For firms experiencing financial distress during 1994, we find that the greater the percentage of affiliated directors on the audit committee, the lower the probability the auditor will issue a going-concern report. These results support regulators' concern about financial-reporting quality and the recent calls for more independent audit committees.

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 · 10.2308/accr.2000.75.4.453

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.

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

Cited by

See all 924

Metadata

Authors
Carcello, J. V., & Neal, T. L.
Venue
The Accounting Review
Published
2000-10-01
Volume
75
Issue
4
Pages
453-467
ISSN
  • 0001-4826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-7967
OpenAlex
W1985979870
Cited by
924
References
0
FWCI
65.23
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: Audit Committee Composition and Auditor Reporting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/accr.2000.75.4.453
The paper
Carcello, J. V., & Neal, T. L. (2000). Audit Committee Composition and Auditor Reporting. The Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2000.75.4.453

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.