Is Self-Regulated Peer Review Effective at Signaling Audit Quality?

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This study examines whether peer reviews conducted under the AICPA's self-regulatory model have been effective at signaling audit quality. Prior research has examined whether peer-review reports are associated with perceived audit quality. We examine whether peer-review reports are associated with actual audit quality. Using a unique data set obtained from the files of an insurance company, we find that peer-review findings are indeed useful in predicting audit failure (i.e., malpractice claims alleging auditor negligence), and that certain types of findings are particularly useful in this regard. We also find that peer-review findings are associated with other firm-specific indicators of potentially weak quality control or risky practices within accounting firms. Taken together, we interpret our findings to indicate that self-regulated peer review as mandated by the AICPA does provide effective signals regarding audit-firm quality.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 109 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.