Ponemon, L.A. (1990), ‘Ethical Judgments in Accounting: A Cognitive-Developmental Perspective’, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 1, pp.191-215.Ponemon, L.A. (1993), ‘The Influence of Ethical Reasoning on <strong>Auditor</strong>s’ Perceptionsof Management’s Competence <strong>and</strong> Integrity’, Advances in Accounting, 11,pp.1-29.Ponemon, L.A. <strong>and</strong> Gabhart, D.R.L. (1990), ‘<strong>Auditor</strong> Independence Judgments: ACognitive-Developmental Model <strong>and</strong> Experimental Evidence’ ContemporaryAccounting Research, 7(1), pp.227-251.Pringle, L.M. <strong>and</strong> Bushman, T.A. (1996), ‘An Examination of Independence in Factwhen <strong>Auditor</strong>s Perform Non<strong>audit</strong> Services for Audit Clients’, AccountingEnquiries, 6, August, pp. 91-120.Ramsay Report, (2001), Independence of Australian Company <strong>Auditor</strong>s: Review ofCurrent Australian Requirements <strong>and</strong> Proposals for Reform, October,Commonwealth of Australia, www.treasury.gov.auReckers, P.M.J. <strong>and</strong> Stagliano, A.J. (1981), ‘Non-Audit Services <strong>and</strong> PerceivedIndependence: Some New Evidence’, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory,1(1), Summer, pp.23-37.Republic of Irel<strong>and</strong> (2000), Report of the Review Group on Auditing, StationeryOffice, Dublin.Reynolds, J.K. <strong>and</strong> Francis, J.R. (2001), ‘Does Size Matter? The Influence of LargeClients on Office-level <strong>Auditor</strong> Reporting Decisions’, Journal of Accounting<strong>and</strong> Economics, 30, pp.375-400.Roush, P B, Jacobs, F A <strong>and</strong> Shockley, R A (1992), ‘The Effects of Non-Audit Services<strong>and</strong> <strong>Auditor</strong> Independence’, Working Paper for AAA.RSA (1995), Tomorrow’s Company: The Role of Business in a Changing World,Royal Society of Arts, London.Ruddock, C., Taylor, S. <strong>and</strong> Taylor, S. (2002), ‘Non-<strong>audit</strong> Services <strong>and</strong> EarningsConservatism: Is <strong>Auditor</strong> Independence Impaired?’, University of Technology,Sydney, SSRN Working Paper.Scheiner, J.H. (1984), ‘An Empirical Assessment of the Impact of SEC Non<strong>audit</strong>Service Disclosure Requirements on Independent <strong>Auditor</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Their Clients’,Journal of Accounting Research, 22(2), Autumn, pp.789-797.Schleifer, L.L.F. <strong>and</strong> Shockley, R.A. (1990), ‘Policies to Promote <strong>Auditor</strong> Independence:More Evidence on the Perception Gap’, Journal of Applied Business Research,7(2), pp.10-17.73
Schuetze, W.P. (1994), ‘A Mountain or a Molehill?’, Remarks by Walter P. Schuetze,Chief Accountant, Securities <strong>and</strong> Exchange Commission of the United States ofAmerica to AICPA’s Twenty-First Annual National Conference on Current SECDevelopments, reproduced in Accounting Horizons, 8(1), March, pp.69-75.Schulte, A.A. (1965), ‘Compatibility of Management Consulting <strong>and</strong> Auditing’, TheAccounting Review, 40(3), July, pp.587-593.SEC (1972), Accounting Series Release 126, Securities <strong>and</strong> Exchange Commission.SEC (1978), Accounting Series Release 250, Securities <strong>and</strong> Exchange Commission.SEC (2000), Final Rule: Revision of the Commission’s <strong>Auditor</strong> IndependenceRequirements, Release No. 33-7870, Securities <strong>and</strong> Exchange Commission[Available at http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7919.htm]Sharma, D.S. (2001), ‘The Association Between Non-<strong>audit</strong> Services <strong>and</strong> thePropensity of Going Concern Qualifications: Implications for AuditIndependence’, Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting <strong>and</strong> Economics, 8, pp.127-142.Sharma, D.S. <strong>and</strong> Sidhu, J. (2001), ‘Professionalism vs Commercialism: TheAssociation Between Non-<strong>audit</strong> Services (NAS) <strong>and</strong> Audit Independence’,Journal of Business Finance <strong>and</strong> Accounting, 28(5/6), June/July, pp.595-629.Shockley, R.A. (1981), ‘Perceptions of <strong>Auditor</strong>s’ Independence: An EmpiricalAnalysis’, The Accounting Review, 56(4), October, pp.785-800.Simon, D.T. (1985), ‘The Audit Services Market: Additional Empirical Evidence’,Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 5(1), Fall, pp.71-77.Simon, D.T. <strong>and</strong> Francis, J.R. (1988), ‘The Effects of <strong>Auditor</strong> Change on Audit Fees:Tests of Price Cutting <strong>and</strong> Price Recovery’, The Accounting Review, 63(2),April, pp.255-269.Simunic, D A (1984), ‘Auditing, Consulting, <strong>and</strong> <strong>Auditor</strong> Independence’, Journal ofAccounting Research, 22(2), Autumn, pp.679-702.Solomon, I. (1990), ‘Discussion of “The Jointness of Audit fees <strong>and</strong> Dem<strong>and</strong> for MAS:A Self-selection Analysis”’, Contemporary Accounting Research, 6(2), pp.323-328.Swanger, S.L. <strong>and</strong> Chewning, E.G. (2001), ‘The Effect of Internal Audit Outsourcingon Financial Analysts’ Perceptions of External <strong>Auditor</strong> Independence’,Auditing: A Journal of Practice <strong>and</strong> Theory, 20(2), September, pp.115-129.Sweeney, J.T. <strong>and</strong> Roberts, R.W. (1997), ‘Cognitive Moral Development <strong>and</strong> <strong>Auditor</strong>Independence’, Accounting, Organizations <strong>and</strong> Society, 22(3/4), pp.337-352.74
- Page 5 and 6:
LIST OF TABLESPage3.1 Definitions a
- Page 7 and 8:
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSACCAAICPAAPBAR
- Page 9 and 10:
Auditor Independence and Non-audit
- Page 11 and 12:
2.2 Current regulatory frameworks:
- Page 13 and 14:
There is limited evidence that, in
- Page 15 and 16:
firms have, over the last 10 years,
- Page 17 and 18:
CHAPTER 2AUDITOR INDEPENDENCE2.1 In
- Page 19 and 20:
low cost strategies to protect and/
- Page 21 and 22:
• the costs of auditor switching
- Page 23 and 24:
Johnstone, Sutton and Warfield (200
- Page 25 and 26:
estrictive. Nevertheless, these stu
- Page 27 and 28:
3.3 Independence in professional an
- Page 29 and 30:
Table 3.1 (cont.): Definitions and
- Page 31 and 32:
followed by a detailed set of rules
- Page 33 and 34:
Provision of some of these services
- Page 35 and 36: There is a significant self-review
- Page 37 and 38: of taking management decisions, sel
- Page 39 and 40: pieces. While a few research-relate
- Page 41 and 42: CHAPTER 5DESCRIPTIVE STUDIES OF NAT
- Page 43 and 44: Ezzamel, Gwilliam and Holland (2002
- Page 45 and 46: Parkash and Venable’s (1993) stud
- Page 47 and 48: CHAPTER 7IMPACT OF JOINT PROVISION
- Page 49 and 50: affirmative to five type of service
- Page 51 and 52: McKinley, Pany and Reckers (1985) u
- Page 53 and 54: NAS and audit fees regardless of th
- Page 55 and 56: 7.3.5 New Zealand studiesGul (1989)
- Page 57 and 58: support those of Corless and Parker
- Page 59 and 60: CHAPTER 8ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN JOINT
- Page 61 and 62: an independent variable in the audi
- Page 63 and 64: Ezzamel, Gwilliam and Holland (2002
- Page 65 and 66: 8.7 Auditor tenure and auditor chan
- Page 67 and 68: CHAPTER 9EVIDENCE OF ASSOCIATION BE
- Page 69 and 70: CHAPTER 10EVIDENCE OF ASSOCIATION B
- Page 71 and 72: 10.3.3 Australian studiesGul and Ts
- Page 73 and 74: the frameworks are generally imprec
- Page 75 and 76: publicly available data of relevanc
- Page 77 and 78: Antle, R. and Demski, J.S. (1991),
- Page 79 and 80: Craswell, A.T., Stokes, D.J. and La
- Page 81 and 82: Frankel, R.M., Johnson, M.F. and Ne
- Page 83 and 84: Jeppesen, K.K. (1998), ‘Reinventi
- Page 85: O’Sullivan, N. and Diacon, S.R. (