The Effects of Industry Specialization on Auditors' Inherent Risk Assessments and Confidence Judgements*

By Mark H. Taylor. 2000

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Model and Literature Review of Professional Skepticism in Auditing (2009, background): “1999), and in some tasks specialists assess lower inherent risk than non-specialists (Taylor 2000).”
Audit Quality: Insights from the Academic Literature (2013, methodology): “12 2002), in performing analytical procedures (Wright and Wright 1997; Green 2008), in assessing components of audit risks (Taylor 2000; Low 2004; Hammersley 2006; Maroney and Simnett 2009), and in disclosing internal control deficiencies (Rose-Green et al. 2011; Stephens 2011).”
Audit Firm Industry Specialization as a Differentiation Strategy: Evidence from Fees Charged to Firms Going Public (2003, background): “As a result, the audit firm is able to perform more efficient audits.3 (See Solomon et al. (1999), Owhoso et al. (2002), and Taylor (2000) for behavioral evidence consistent with this assertion.)”
Audit firm industry specialization and the audit report lag (2011, background): “…attributed to a comprehensive understanding of companies’ error characteristics (Hammersley, 2006; Maletta & Wright, 1996; Solomon, Shields, & Whittington, 1999); industry-specific tasks (Owhoso, Messier, & Lynch, 2002; Taylor, 2000); and increased performance gains (Dowling & Moroney, 2008).”