Vi tycker att en liknande studie som vår avseende ”going concern” formuleringar vore intressant, men att man använder sig av fler variabler som revisionsbyrå för att se om det finns skillnader mellan dem eller om bolagets omsättning har någon inverkan. Eftersom vår studie är en av få studier som finns på området ”going concern” varningars formulering, kan det vara intressant att studera detta område vidare. Exempelvis att man intervjuar revisorer med lång erfarenhet av revision och försöker få klarhet i varför det finns flera olika formuleringar av bedömningen av ”going concern”.
Vårt resultat avviker från internationella studier som är gjorda i ämnet och det kan vara intressant att göra en undersökning kring ämnet igen för att se om resultatet blir annorlunda. Det vore även intressant att göra en jämförelse med andra länder, för att se om resultatet blir liknade eller inom det finns regioner som har liknande resultat. Då vår studie gjordes i spåren av finanskrisen vore det intressant att göra en liknande studie när det är mer stabilt på marknaden, för att se om det blir liknande kategorier.
35
KÄLLFÖRTECKNING
Anandarajan, A., Kleinman, G. & Palmon, D. (2008). Novice and expert judgment in the presence of going concern uncertainty. Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 23, Nr. 4, s. 345- 366.
Arnedo, L, Lizarrage, F. & Sánchez S. (2008). Going-concern Uncertainties in Pre-bankrupt Audit Reports: New Evidence Regarding Discretionary Accruals and Wording Ambiguity,
International Journal of Auditing, Vol. 12, Nr. 1, s. 25-44.
Arnold, V., Collier, P., Leech, S. & Sutton, S. (2001). The impact of political pressure on novice decision makers: are auditors qualified to make going concern judgments? Critical
Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 12, Nr. 3, s. 323-338.
Asare, S.K. (1990). The auditor's going-concem decision: A review and implications for futureResearch, Joumal of Accounting Literature; Vol. 9, Nr. 9, s. 39-64.
Barnes, P. & Huan, H.D. (1993). The auditors going concern decision: Some UK evidence Concerning independence and competence. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Vol. 20, Nr. 2, s. 213-228.
Behn B.K., Kaplan S.E. & Krumwiede K.R. (2001). Further Evidence on the Auditor's Going-Concern Report: The Influence of Management Plans, Auditing: A Journal of Practice
Theory, Vol. 20, Nr. 1, s. 13-28.
Beasly, M. & Petroni, K. (2001). Board Independence and Audit Firm Type, Auditing: A
Journal of Practice Theory, Vol. 20, Nr.1, s. 97-114.
Bryman, A. & Bell, E. (2005) Företagsekonomiska forskningsmetoder, Liber Ekonomi, Malmö.
Campbell, J. & Mutchler, J. (1988). The "expectations gap" and going-concern uncertainties.
Accounting Horizons, Vol. 2, Nr.1, s. 42-49.
Carey, P. J., Geiger, M. A. & O’Connell, B. T. (2008). Costs Associated With Going- Concern-Modified Audit Opinions: An Analysis of the Australian Audit Market. Abacus A
Journal of Accounting, Finance and Business studies, Vol. 44, Nr. 1, s. 61-81.
Carmichael, D.R., Willingham, J.J. & Schaller, C.A. (1996) Auditing concepts and methods, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Campisi, S. & Trotman, K. (1985). Auditor consensus in going concern judgments. Auditing
36 Carcello, J.V., Hermanson, D.R & Neal, T.L. (2003). ´Auditor reporting behaviour when GAAS lack specifictiy the cases of SAS No. 59´ Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol. 22, s. 63-81.
Citron D.B. & Taffler R.J. (1992). The Audit Report under Going Concern Uncertainties: An Empirical Analysis. Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 22, Nr. 88, s. 337-345.
Citron D.B. & Taffler R.J. (2001). Ethical Behaviour in the U.K. Audit Profession: The Case of the Self-Fulfilling Prohecy under Going-Concern Uncertainties. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 29, Nr. 4, s. 353-363.
Chow, C.W. & Rice, S.J. (1982). Qualified Audit Opinions and Auditor Switching, The
Accounting Review; Vol. 57, Nr. 2, s. 326-336.
Deegan, C. & Unerman, J. (2006). Financial accounting theory. McGraw-Hill companies. Dye, R.A. (1993). Auditing Standards, Legal Liability, and Auditor Wealth, The Journal of
Political Economy, Vol. 101, Nr. 5, s. 887-914.
Eriksson, L.-T. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (2006). Att utreda, forska och rapportera. Malmö: Liber.
Eriksson-Ek, T. & Pellikka, J. (2003). Revisionspliktens betydelse ur ett intressentperspektiv –
En survey av fem externa och upplysta intressenter, Luleå Tekniska Universitet,
Magisteruppsats.
FAR (2010). Samlingsvolymen Revision. Stockholm: FAR Förlag AB.
Flint, D. (1988). Philosophy and principles of auditing. An Introduction. London: The Macmillan press ltd.
Firth, M & Liau-Tan, C.K. (1998). Auditor quality, signalling, and the valuation of initial public offerings, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Vol. 25, s. 145-165.
Geiger, M.A. & Raghunandan, K. (2002). Auditor Tenure and Audit Reporting Failures.
Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, Vol. 21, Nr. 1, s. 67-79.
George, C., Spiceland, D. & George, S. (1996). A Longitudinal Study of the Going-Concern Audit Decision and Survival Time. Advances in Quantitative Analysis of Finance and
37 Giroux, G. (2008). What went wrong? Accounting Fraud and Lessons From the Recent
Scandals. Social research, Vol. 75, Nr. 4, s. 1205-1238.
Gordon, L.A. & Hamer, M. (1983). GASB’s Survival Potential: An agency Perspective,
Public Budgeting & Finance; Vol. 3, Nr 1, s. 103-112.
Halvorsen, K. (2006) Samhällsvetenskaplig metod, Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Healy, P.M. & Palepu, K.G. (2003). The Fall of Enron, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 17, Nr. 2, s. 3-26.
Holme, I. M & Krohn Solvang, B. (1997). Forskningsmetodik – Om kvalitativa och
kvantitativa metoder, Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Hopwood, W., McKeown, J.C. & Mutchler, J. (1989). A Test of the Incremental Explanatory Power of Opinions Qualified for Consistency and Uncertainty. The Accounting Review, Vol. 64, Nr. 1, s. 28-49.
Humphrey, G.C. Moizer, P. & Turley, S. (1992). The Audit Expectations Gap in the united
kingdom, London: ICAEW.
Humphrey, C. (2008). Auditing research: a review across the disciplinary divide. Accounting,
Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 21, Nr. 2, s. 170-203.
Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W.H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 3, Nr. 4, s. 305-360 Kahlil, F. & Lawarrée, J. (1995). Collusive auditors. American Economic Review, Vol. 85, Nr. 2, s. 442-446
Kida, T. (1980). An Investigation into Auditors’ Continuity and Related Qualification Judgements. Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 18, Nr. 2, s. 506-523.
Koh, H.C. & Tan, S.S. (1999). A neural network approach to the prediction of going concern status, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 29, s. 211-216.
Krishnagopal.M. & Williams.D.D. (2010). Investor Reaction to Going Concern Audit Reports: Accounting Review, Vol. 85, Nr. 6, s 2075-2105.
Krishnan, J. & Krishnan, J. (1996). The role of economic trade-offs in the audit opinion decision: an empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, Vol. 11, Nr. 4, s. 565–586.
38 Lai, K.W. (2009). Audit Opinion and Disclosure of Audit Fees. Journal of Accounting,
Auditing & Finance, Vol. 24, Nr. 1, s. 91-114.
Laitinen, E.K. & Laitinen, T. (1998). Qualified audit reports in Finland: evidence from large companies, The European Accounting Review, Vol. 7, s. 639-653.
Lee, P., Stokes, D., Taylor, S. & Walter, T. (2003). The association between audit quality, accounting disclosures and firm-specific risk: evidence from initial public offerings, Journal
of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol. 22, s. 377-400.
Lee, T (1994). Further evidence on auditor concentration: The case of a growing market.
International Journal of Accounting, Vol. 29, s. 234-50.
Louwers, T.J., Messina, F.M. & Richard, M.D. (1999). The Auditor's Going-Concern Disclosure as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: A Discrete-Time Survival Analysis, Decision
Sciences, Vol. 30, Nr. 3, s. 805-823.
Mautz, R.K. & Sharaf, H.A. (1961). The Philosophy of auditing. Sarasota: American Accounting Association.
McKeown, J.C., Mutchler, J.F. & Hopwood, W. (1991). Towards an Explanation of Auditor Failure to Modify the Audit Opinions of Bankrupt Companies. Auditing: A Journal of
Practice & Theory, Vol. 10, s. 1-13.
Mutchler, J. (1984). Auditor’s perceptions of the going-concern opinion decision, Auditing: A
Journal of Practice and Theory; Vol. 3, Nr. 2, s. 17–30.
O’Reilly, D. (2010). Do investors perceive the going-concern opinion as useful for pricing stocks? Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 25, Nr. 1, s. 4-16.
Porter, B., Simon, J. & Hatherly, D. (2003). Principles of External Auditing, Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Ruiz-Barbadillo, E., Aguilar, N. G., Defuentes-Barbera, C. & Garcia-Benau, M.A. (2004). Audit Quality and the Going concern Decision-making Process: Spanish Evidence, European
Accounting Review, Vol. 13, Nr. 4, s. 597–620.
Scott, W.R. (2003). Financial Accounting Theory, Third Edition, Pearson Education, Toronto. Thorell, P. & Norberg, C. (2005). Revisionsplikten i små aktiebolag. Stockholm: Svenskt Näringsliv.
39 Titman, S. & Trueman, B. (1986). Information quality and the valuation of new issues,
Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 8, s. 159-172.
Trotman, K.T. & Wright, A. (1996). “Recency effects: task complexity, decision mode, and task-specific experience”, Behavioral Research in Accounting, Vol. 8, s. 175-93.
Uhlin, O. & Westberg, G. (2009). ”Going concern” revisionen enligt RS 570 – Hur träffsäkra
är revisorer på fortlevnadsbedömningar och vad påverkar deras bedömningar?. (Rapport
från Ekonomprogrammet). Mittuniversitetet, Samhällsvetenskapliga institutionen, 851 70 Sundsvall.
Vanstraelen, A. (2003). Going-Concern Opinions, Auditor Switching, and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Effect Examined in the Regulatory Context of Belgium. Journal of Accounting
Auditing and Finance, Vol. 18, Nr. 2, s. 231-253.
Wolnizer, P.W. (1987). Auditing as independent authentication. Sydney University Press: Sydney.
Zavgren, C.V. (1983). The prediction of corporate failure: the state of the art, Journal of
Accounting Literature; Vol. 2, s. 1–35.
Öhman, P. (2007). Perspektiv på revision: tankemönster, förväntningsgap och dilemman. Mid Sweden University, department of Social Sciences: Sundsvall
Özcelik, F & Liu, S. (2010). Revisorers ”going concern” bedömningar – i förhållande till
företagens bransch och storlek. (Rapport från Ekonomprogrammet). Mittuniversitetet,
Samhällsvetenskapliga institutionen, 851 70 Sundsvall Elektroniska källor