An experimental analysis of potential unintended consequences of Sarbanes-Oxley on auditors' professional judgments and the expectation gap

2006 2006

Other formats: Order a copy

Abstract (summary)

Two experiments were conducted to explore potential unintended consequences of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on (i) auditors' professional judgments and (ii) the general public's expectation gap boundary. The first experiment examined auditors' judgments and decision behaviors in the presence of jointly imposed organizational (internal) and environmental (external) pressures. Differing pressure levels relating to an audit budget (an internally imposed pressure), and the likelihood of a public company inspection of the same attest engagement by the newly formed Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (an externally imposed pressure), were manipulated. These competing pressures were hypothesized to influence the way auditors perform certain required tasks, with potentially adverse and unintended effects. A model was proposed that predicted environmental pressure would moderate the effect of organizational pressure on auditors' completion of such tasks. Participants were 93 practicing auditors from a large international public accounting firm. The main effects of internal and external pressure did not influence respondents' methodological preference for completing the required audit task. However, the participating auditors preferred a qualitatively superior method of completing a required audit task under all pressure combinations. The hypothesized moderation was not supported. The second experiment examined whether newly mandated reporting requirements by senior managements and independent auditors on the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting would exacerbate the expectation gap by increasing the general public's degree of assurance expected of management and the auditor related to internal control reporting. In a hypothetical shareholders' lawsuit relating to an alleged failure to prevent or detect a significant deficiency in internal controls over financial reporting, participants were asked to attribute liability and award monetary damages, if any, against management and the auditor. Under Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, senior managements of public companies and their independent auditor must now publicly report on the effectiveness of a company's internal control over financial reporting. This increased reporting transparency was hypothesized to increase the degree of assurance that mock jurors believe management and the auditor must provide on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. The new method of reporting was also hypothesized to increase the extent of liability and size of monetary damages awarded against management and the auditor in a jury setting, relative to jury awards in the prior method of reporting. A model was proposed that predicted the relationship between level of reporting on internal controls and jury awards would be mediated by the participants' degree of assurance beliefs. The experiment was conducted as a between-groups analysis with three methods of auditor/management reporting. Participants were 66 volunteers recruited from a southwestern university. Results suggest that the mode of reporting had no influence on participants' degree of assurance expected of senior management and the auditor. Similarly, the reporting method had no influence on the attribution of liability or the award of monetary damages against either senior management or the auditor. However, the degree of assurance expectations were found to significantly influence jury awards. The hypothesized mediation was not supported.

Indexing (details)

Public Company Accounting Reform & Investor Protection Act 2002-US;
Expectation gap;
Auditors opinions;
Internal controls
0272: Accounting
0398: Law
Identifier / keyword
Social sciences; Auditors; Expectation gap; Jury awards; Professional judgments; Sarbanes-Oxley Act
An experimental analysis of potential unintended consequences of Sarbanes-Oxley on auditors' professional judgments and the expectation gap
Daugherty, Brian Eugene
Number of pages
Publication year
Degree date
School code
DAI-A 67/05, Dissertation Abstracts International
Place of publication
Ann Arbor
Country of publication
United States
Hatfield, Richard C.
The University of Texas at San Antonio
University location
United States -- Texas
Source type
Dissertations & Theses
Document type
Dissertation/thesis number
ProQuest document ID
Database copyright ProQuest LLC; ProQuest does not claim copyright in the individual underlying works.
Document URL
Access the complete full text

You can get the full text of this document if it is part of your institution's ProQuest subscription.

Try one of the following:

  • Connect to ProQuest through your library network and search for the document from there.
  • Request the document from your library.
  • Go to the ProQuest login page and enter a ProQuest or My Research username / password.