Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1953. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 216-228).

Drawing on the relevant psychology literature, three procedural variables that could influence the auditors' information processing when making going concern opinion decisions were identified. These procedural variables are the decision frame, the order in which evidence is evaluated and the initial belief held by the auditor. With respect to the decision frame, it was predicted that belief revision after processing contrary information (mitigating factors) is higher for auditors who frame their initial hypothesis in terms of viability (failure). This prediction hinges on the assumption that more weight is put on disconfirmatory information than on confirmatory information, holding "information content" constant. Second, denoting P(C) as the auditors' judgment just before processing contrary information (mitigating factors), it was hypothesized that contrary information (mitigating factors) has a bigger effect on belief revision as ex ante P(C) increases (decreases). Finally with respect to the order of evaluating evidence, it was posited that recency effects occur in belief revision and that these recency effects will be manifest in the auditors' opinion decision. These predictions were tested in a field experiment using 70 experienced auditors from four Big Eight firms. Results of the experiment provided support for the predictions relating to the initial belief and the order in which evidence was evaluated. However, the predictions relating to the decision frame were not supported. Furthermore, the study indicated that auditors exhibited considerable variability in their interpretation of substantial doubt (the standard of proof in SAS 59). Whereas some auditors interpreted this requirement as the preponderance of probability, others required a substantially higher level of probability as a threshold of proof for issuing unqualified opinions. Incidentally, it was discovered that this variability was partly accounted for by auditors' firm affiliation. Implications of these results for the audit review, the standard setting process and the nature of expertise in auditing are discussed.

M.Comm. / The purpose of this dissertation is to determine the role and responsibility of the auditor in assessing the going concern status of South African companies implementing buybacks. The provisions of current legislation in this regard, including the Companies Act and the JSE Listing Requirements will be discussed and the question of whether the current status of the auditor's involvement in the buyback process is sufficient will be explored. Furthermore, since no specific requirement regarding the going concern assessment with regard to buybacks is placed on the auditor in terms of the Companies Act or the JSE Listing Requirements, the responsibility of the auditor with regard to the going concern concept within the scope of a normal statutory audit will be explored. A workable guideline will be developed to assist the auditor in assessing the impact of a buyback on the company's ability to continue as a going concern and consideration will be given to the process that the auditor should follow in reaching a conclusion on whether a buyback raises a material uncertainty surrounding the company's ability to continue as a going concern. However, before the issue of the auditor's responsibility with regard to the going concern concept in relation to share buybacks can be addressed, it is necessary to obtain an understanding of the legislation, financial, accounting and taxation implications of buybacks. These factors will be addressed in this study before the auditor's involvement in the buyback process is evaluated.

Under the going-concern concept, an entity is assumed to be a going concern when it is able and willing to continue operations in the foreseeable future. Although substantial agreement exists as to the meaning and role of the going-concern concept, it is difficult to make going-concern assessments in the course of an audit. In particular, existing auditing guidelines contained in SAS No. 34 are inadequate and existing going-concern prediction models are flawed. In view of this, the objective of the dissertation is to construct a going-concern prediction model (hereafter called the Koh model) that is based upon improved statistical techniques and methodology. A sample of 165 companies that filed for bankruptcy during the period 1980 to 1985 and a matched sample of 165 non-bankrupt companies are used to construct and test the Koh model. Following the lead taken by the proposed SAS on going-concern assessments, a non-going concern is operationalized as a bankrupt company. For each of the sample companies, six financial ratios as specified by the proposed theory of bankruptcy are obtained. Probit analysis with the weighted exogenous sample maximum likelihood procedure is used to estimate the coefficients of the Koh model. Using the Lachenbruch U method, the hold-out accuracy rates of the Koh model are computed. They are 85.45% for non-going concerns, 100.00% for going concerns, and 99.91% overall. With these accuracy rates, the Koh model compares favorably with other going-concern prediction models suggested in the literature and the auditors. The effects of misclassification costs of Type I and Type II errors on the Koh model are also considered. It is found that the optimal cut-off probability for the Koh model is very insensitive to varying relative misclassification costs. Coupled with its high predictive ability and stability, the Koh model can be an effective prediction model, analytical tool, and defensive device for auditors. Further, the methodology developed and employed in the dissertation can contribute to the current state-of-the-art in constructing prediction models such as going-concern or bankruptcy prediction models, takeover/acquisition prediction models, and loan default prediction models. / Ph. D.

This study examines whether the probability of a firm receiving a going concern modified report or a standard audit report with note disclosure of a going concern uncertainty has increased after the issuance of SAS No. 59. This study also examines whether the probability of a firm having no reference to a going concern uncertainty in its audit report or the financial statement notes has decreased after the issuance of SAS No. 59. The findings provide support for the hypotheses that a firm has a higher probability of receiving a standard audit report with note disclosure of a going concern ('J uncertainty and a lower probability of receiving no reference to a going concern uncertainty in the audit report or the financial statement notes after the issuance of SAS No. 59. However, this study finds no support for the hypothesis that a firm has a higher probability of receiving a going concern modified report after the issuance of SAS No. 59. The findings of this study suggest that the Auditing Standards Board, the government, and the accounting profession should consider the impact of SAS No. 59 on the presence of note disclosure when assessing the success or failure of SAS No. 59 in decreasing the so-called audit expectation gap.

The overall purpose of this study is to establish whether auditors in South Africa also fail to issue the appropriate audit opinion on the going concern assumption underlying financial statements the reasons for auditors' failure to issue the appropriate audit opinion on the going concern assumption The hypotheses of this study are tested by examining professional auditing standards and secondary data on the going concern assumption conducting an empirical study of listed industrial compames whose listings were terminated because of financial failure This study provides evidence that auditors in South Africa fail to Issue the appropriate audit opinion on the going concern assumption advances specific reasons for this failure / Auditing / M. Comm. (Auditing)

The overall purpose of this study is to establish whether auditors in South Africa also fail to issue the appropriate audit opinion on the going concern assumption underlying financial statements the reasons for auditors' failure to issue the appropriate audit opinion on the going concern assumption The hypotheses of this study are tested by examining professional auditing standards and secondary data on the going concern assumption conducting an empirical study of listed industrial compames whose listings were terminated because of financial failure This study provides evidence that auditors in South Africa fail to Issue the appropriate audit opinion on the going concern assumption advances specific reasons for this failure / Auditing / M. Comm. (Auditing)