바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

logo

Key Audit Matters Readability and Investor Reaction

Key Audit Matters Readability and Investor Reaction

The Journal of Distribution Science(JDS) / The Journal of Distribution Science, (P)1738-3110; (E)2093-7717
2022, v.20 no.9, pp.73-81
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.20.09.202209.73
CHIRAKOOL, Wichuta (Mahasarakham Business School, Mahasarakham University)
POONPOOL, Nuttavong (Mahasarakham Business School, Mahasarakham University)
WANGCHAROENDATE, Suwan (Mahasarakham Business School, Mahasarakham University)
BHONGCHIRAWATTANA, Utis (Mahasarakham Business School, Mahasarakham University)
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to examine whether key audit matters (KAMs) readability influences investor reaction. Research design, data, and methodology: The signaling theory was applied to explain the behavior of investors when they receive useful information for their decisions. Data were collected from 1,866 firm-year observations from Thai listed companies in both the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) and the Market for Alternative Investment (MAI) for the fiscal years of 2016-2019. The study was based on secondary data, which were collected from the SET Market Analysis and Reporting Tool (SETSMART) database and the Stock Exchange of Thailand's website (www.set.or.th). A statistical regression method was used with panel data analysis to evaluate possible associations between KAMs readability and investor reaction. The study relied on popular readability measures (Fog Index). Moreover, investor reaction was measured by absolute cumulative abnormal return and abnormal trading volume. Results: It was found that the KAMs readability has positive significance on both absolute cumulative abnormal return and abnormal trading volume. Conclusion: This study showed a significant contribution to the implication of KAMs in an emerging economy. The results reveal that more readable KAMs disclosure distributed new insights and useful information to investors and led to reducing the information gap between auditors and investors.

keywords
Key Audit Matters, Readability, Investor Reaction, Audit Report Distribution, Emerging Market

참고문헌

1.

Al‐mulla, M., & Bradbury, M. E. (2022). Auditor, Client and Investor Consequences of the Enhanced Auditor’s Report. International Journal of Auditing, 26(2), 134-150.

2.

Asare, S. K., & Wright, A. M. (2012). Investors’, Auditors’, and Lenders’ Understanding of the Message Conveyed by the Standard Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements. Accounting Horizons, 26(2), 193-217.

3.

Baltagi, B. (2008). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Great Britain

4.

. Bédard, J., Gonthier-Besacier, N., & Schatt, A. (2015). Analysis of the Consequences of the Disclosure of Key Audit Matters in the Audit Report. The British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA) 25th Audit & Assurance Conference, Edinburgh University.

5.

Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2005). Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications. Cambridge university press.

6.

Christensen, B. E., Glover, S. M., & Wolfe, C. J. (2014). Do Critical Audit Matter Paragraphs in the Audit Report Change Nonprofessional Investors’ Decision to Invest? Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 33(4), 71-93.

7.

Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling Theory: A Review and Assessment. Journal of management, 37(1), 39-67.

8.

Czerney, K., Schmidt, J. J., & Thompson, A. M. (2019). Do Investors Respond to Explanatory Language Included in Unqualified Auditor’s Reports? Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(1), 198-229.

9.

Gutierrez, E., Minutti-Meza, M., Tatum, K. W., & Vulcheva, M. (2018). Consequences of Adopting an Expanded Auditor’s Report in the United Kingdom. Review of Accounting Studies, 23(4), 1543-1587.

10.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

11.

Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification Tests in Econometrics. Econometrica: Journal of the econometric society, 46, 1251-1271.

12.

Hay, D. (1998). Communication in Auditors’ Reports: Variations in Readability and the Effect of Audit Firm Structure. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting, 5(2), 179-197.

13.

Kitiwong, W., & Sarapaivanich, N. (2020). Consequences of the Implementation of Expanded Audit Reports with Key Audit Matters (KAMs) on Audit Quality. Managerial Auditing Journal, 35(8), 1095-1119.

14.

Köhler, A., Ratzinger-Sakel, N., & Theis, J. (2020). The Effects of Key Audit Matters on the Auditor’s Report’s Communicative Value: Experimental Evidence from Investment Professionals and Non-professional Investors. Accounting in Europe, 17(2), 105-128.

15.

Lennox, C. S., Schmidt, J. J., & Thompson, A. M. (2022). Why are Expanded Audit Reports Not Informative to Investors? Evidence from the United Kingdom. Review of Accounting Studies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-021-09650-4

16.

Li, F. (2008). Annual Report Readability, Current Earnings, and Earnings Persistence. Journal of Accounting and economics, 45(2-3), 221-247.

17.

Loughran, T., & McDonald, B. (2016). Textual Analysis in Accounting and Finance: A Survey. Journal of Accounting Research, 54(4), 1187-1230.

18.

Park, H. M. (2011). Practical Guides to Panel Data Modeling: A Step-by-Step Analysis Using Stata. Public Management and Policy Analysis Program, Graduate School of International Relations, International University of Japan, 12, 1-52.

19.

Reid, L. C., Carcello, J. V., Li, C., Neal, T. L., & Francis, J. R. (2019). Impact of Auditor Report Changes on Financial Reporting Quality and Audit Costs: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(3), 1501-1539.

20.

Salehi, M., Kamalahmadi, S., & Bahrami, M. (2014). Prediction of Auditor Selection Using a Combination of PSO Algorithm and CART in Iran. Journal of Distribution Science, 12(3), 33-41.

21.

Seebeck, A., & Kaya, D. (2022). The power of words: an empirical analysis of the communicative value of extended auditor reports. European Accounting Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2021.2021097

22.

Shin, I. H. (2019). Market Competition and Audit Quality in Distribution and Service Industries. Journal of Distribution Science, 17(4), 33-39.

23.

Sirois, L. P., Bédard, J., & Bera, P. (2018). The Informational Value of Key Audit Matters in the Auditor's Report: Evidence from an Eye-tracking Study. Accounting Horizons, 32(2), 141-162.

24.

Smith, K. (2016). Tell Me More: A Content Analysis of Expanded Auditor Reporting in the United Kingdom. The British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA) 26th Audit & Assurance Conference, University of Oxford.

25.

Spence, M. (1973). Job Market Signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355-374.

26.

Suttipun, M. (2020). KAM Reporting and Common Share Price of Listed Companies in the Market of Alternative Investment from Thailand. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 24(3), 1-10.

27.

Suttipun, M. (2021). External Auditor and KAMs Reporting in Alternative Capital Market of Thailand. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(1), 74-93.

28.

Valipour, H., Salehi, F., & Bahrami, M. (2013). Predicting Audit Reports Using Meta-Heuristic Algorithms. Journal of Distribution Science, 11(6), 13-19.

29.

Velte, P. (2018). Does Gender Diversity in the Audit Committee Influence Key Audit Matters’ Readability in the Auditor’s Report? UK Evidence. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(4), 748-755.

30.

Velte, P., & Issa, J. (2019). The Impact of Key Audit Matter (KAM) Disclosure in Auditor’s Reports on Stakeholders’ Reactions: A Literature Review. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 17(3), 323-341.

31.

Washburn, M. (2017). The Effect of Auditing Standard No. 5 on Audit Delay and Audit Fees. Nova Southeastern University.

The Journal of Distribution Science(JDS)