348 / 414
亞洲地區審計品質研究回顧
348
4. Cross-Country Research
This paper reviews 19 cross-country audit quality studies using Asia market as a
sample. Among these studies, almost one-third appears in
Contemporary Accounting
Research
(
CAR
). As to the countries examined, Singapore, Malaysia, and Hong Kong are the
most popular countries, which are included in 17, 17, and 16 studies, respectively. Most of
cross-country studies focus on the issues for audit demand. For example, analyzing eight
East Asian countries, Fan and Wong (2005) indicate that auditors play a governance role, in
particular, they find that firms are more likely to hire Big 5 auditors when their ownership
indicate agency conflicts. Recently, Guedhami et al. (2014) document that, using a sample of
28 countries (including ten Asian countries), firms with political connections are more likely
to choose a Big 4 auditor, consistent with the notion that management want to assure
investors they improve accounting transparency. We also discuss the problems and
challenges faced in cross-country auditing research and urge future study to focus on the
Asia market, the most rapid economic growth region in the world.
5. Single-Country Research
We review 45 single-country studies on audit quality. These studies appear more often
in the Journal of Accounting and Public Policy (JAPP), CAR, Auditing: A Journal of Practice
& Theory (AJPT), and The Accounting Review (TAR). The number one audit market studied
is China, followed by Taiwan audit market. Most studies were coauthored by scholars from
different countries. Many single-country studies either examine the effects of the regulation
changes or take advantage of the unique data set resulting from specific requirements in a
given country to test the audit theory. For example, Chen, Sun, and Wu (2010) examine the
effect of legal and regulatory changes in China on the relationship between client importance
and audit quality. They find that after 2001, when litigation and sanction risks became
significantly higher, auditors are more likely to issue modified audit opinion for important
clients. Ke et al. (2015) demonstrate that Big 4 assign less experienced audit partners to
clients that are listed only in China, a relatively weak institutional environment, compared
with clients that are cross-listed in Hong Kong. They provide evidence that Big 4 auditors
charge lower audit fees and are less likely to issue modified audit reports for clients only
listed in China. Using data from Taiwan, Aobdia et al. (2015) find a positive association
between the partner’s quality and the client firm’s earnings response coefficient. They also
find a positive market reaction when a firm switches to a higher quality auditor, suggesting