英语翻译2.2.2.Other Studies.In addition to these event studies,three recent empirical studies each concludes that the insurance rationale for audit quality appears to dominate the reputation rationale.Lennox (1999) finds that larger U.K.auditors

英语翻译2.2.2.Other Studies.In addition to these event studies,three recent empirical studies each concludes that the insurance rationale for audit quality appears to dominate the reputation rationale.Lennox (1999) finds that larger U.K.auditors
英语翻译
2.2.2.Other Studies.In addition to these event studies,three recent empirical studies
each concludes that the insurance rationale for audit quality appears to dominate the reputation
rationale.Lennox (1999) finds that larger U.K.auditors are more likely to be sued and criticized
in the business press.He also finds that when an audit firm is criticized (e.g.,for rendering a
clean opinion to an ex post bankrupt company),they do not manifest a decrease in market share
or an increase in client defections.Overall,Lennox (1999) interprets his findings as consistent
(inconsistent) with an insurance rationale (reputation rationale) for audit quality.
In a study of small U.S.IPOs,a context with substantial diversity in auditor type,
Willenborg (1999) studies the relation between audit firm size and both underpricing and audit
fees.He shows that the inverse relation between auditor size and underpricing is also evident for
start-up company IPOs,a setting where he argues the reputation rationale for audit quality is less
important.He also shows that audit fees are positively associated with the IPO proceeds,which
is the upper limit of the auditor’s implicit insurance coverage to investors.He concludes that his
“…results suggest the importance of an insurance-based demand for IPO audits” (p.237).

英语翻译2.2.2.Other Studies.In addition to these event studies,three recent empirical studies each concludes that the insurance rationale for audit quality appears to dominate the reputation rationale.Lennox (1999) finds that larger U.K.auditors
2.2.2.其他研究.除了那些主要的研究之外,三个新的经验研究
每一个都推断出审计质量保险原理表现得要高于声誉原理.
莱尼克斯(1999) 发现更多的英国审计员更倾向于被起诉与在商业舆论中被批评.
他同样发现 当一个审计事务所被批评 (例如,为一个事后估计破产的公司提供无保留意见),
他们没有揭露市场份额的减少与客户背叛的增加.
大体说来,莱尼克斯(1999)将他的发现解释为与审计质量的保险原理 (声誉原理)一致（不一致）.
在美国小型IPO的研究中,一个背景关于审计类型中的实质性差异,
威棱博格 (1999) 研究审计事务所的规模 还有削价以及审计费之间的关系.
他展示了审计员规模与削低定价之间的反向关系也显然出现在原始公司的IPO上,
一个背景他 主张声誉原理对于审计质量是不重要的.
他同样展示审计费确实与IPO的收入相关联,这是审计员的内含保险的对投资者的上限准备金.
他断定他的
“…结果建议IPO审计的重要性要求以保险基础” (第237页).

2.2.2. 其他学习。 除这些事件研究之外，三项最近经验主义的研究
each认为，审计质量的保险理论基础看上去控制名誉
rationale. lennox (1999)发现更大的英国审计员是可能被起诉并且批评了
in商业新闻。 他也发现那，当审计企业被批评时(即，为回报对一家事后破产公司的clean观点)，他们不体现在市场份额的减退or在客户背叛的增量。 overall...

全部展开

2.2.2. 其他学习。 除这些事件研究之外，三项最近经验主义的研究
each认为，审计质量的保险理论基础看上去控制名誉
rationale. lennox (1999)发现更大的英国审计员是可能被起诉并且批评了
in商业新闻。 他也发现那，当审计企业被批评时(即，为回报对一家事后破产公司的clean观点)，他们不体现在市场份额的减退or在客户背叛的增量。 overall， Lennox (1999)解释他的研究结果作为一致的
(不一致)与保险理论基础(名誉理论基础)的审计质量。
In小美国IPOs，上下文的研究以在审计员类型的坚固变化，
Willenborg (1999)学习在审计企业大小之间的联系和定低价和审计
fees. 他表示，在审计员大小和定低价之间的相反联系为也是显然的start-up公司IPOs，他争论审计质量的名誉理论基础的设置是较少
important. 他也表示，审计费肯定地同IPO收益联系在一起，
is auditor’s含蓄保险责任范围的上限对投资者的。 他认为，他的
“…results建议基于保险的需求的重要性对IPO audits” (p. 237)的。

收起