OPINION ANALYSIS GOING CONCERN THROUGH AUDITOR QUALITY AND AUDITOR EXPERIENCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32812/jibeka.v12i1.17Keywords:
Going Concern, Audit Quality, Audit OpinionAbstract
The research was conducted in Malang City area with auditor as the population while the sample with pursposive sampling while the data analysis used is variable test with linkert scale and using SPPS statitisk test. In this study conducted at the Public Accounting Firm in Malang, showed that by using validity test, reliability, assumption Heterokedastisitas, multicolinierity assumption test, hypothesis testing simultaneously and partial and autocorrelation test showed that the questionnaire used by the researchers is feasible as a measuring tool for analysis in this study and provide consistent results. In the test results Hypothesis gives results that reject Ho and accept the hypothesis of research Ha, so that the auditor experience and audit quality together provide a significant effect on going concern opinion. Partial experience does not affect the giving of going concern opinion while the quality of audit partially affect the giving of going concern opinion.
References
1.Abdolmohammadi, M dan A. Wright.1987. An Examination of Effect of Experience and Task Complexcity on Audit judgment, Journal of The Accounting Review., LXII (1) : 1-13.
2.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1988. Statement on auditing standards No. 59: the auditor's consideration of an entity's ability to continue as a going concern, New York: AICPA.
3.Asare, S. K. 1992. The Auditor's Going Concern Decision: Interaction of Task Variables and The Sequential Processing of Evidence, The Accounting Review, Vol. 67, no. 2 (April), pp: 379-393.
4.Ashton, A. H. 1991. Experience and Error Frequency Knowledge as Potential Determinants of Audit Expertise, The Accounting Review, Vol. 66, no. 2 (April), pp: 218-239.
5.Chen, K.C dan B.K. Church. 1992. Default on Debt obligations and the Issuance of Going-Concern Report. Auditing: Journal Practice and Theory. Fall.p 30-49.
6.Deangelo, L.E. 1981. Auditor independence, lowballing, and disclosure regulation, Journal of Accounting and Economics: 113-127.
7.Deis, D.R. & Giroux, G.A. (1992). Determinants of Audit Quality in the Public Sector. The Accounting Review, 67, 3, 462-479
8.Fanny, Margaretta dan Sylvia Saputra. 2005. Opini Audit Going Concern: Kajian Berdasarkan Model Prediksi Kebangkrutan, Pertumbuhan Perusahaan, dan Reputasi Kantor Akuntan Publik (Study pada Emiten Bursa Efek Jakarta), Prosiding SNA VIII. Solo
9.Fredrick.V.B.,H.Hoffman, dan R.Libby. 1994. Structure of auditors’ knowledge of financial statement errors. Auditing: A journal of Practice & Theory.
10.Geiger, Marshall dan D.V. Rama, 2006. Audit firm size and going concern reporting accuracy. Accounting Horizons, Vol. 20 No. 1: 1-17
11.Ghozali, Imam. 2009. “Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS “. Semarang : UNDIP
12.Gosh, Aloke dan D.Moon. 2004. Auditor Tenure and Perceptions of Audit Quality, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, (January/March): 209-247
13.Haron, Hasnah., Bambang Hartadi., Mahfooz Ansari, dan Ishak Ismail. 2009. Factors influencing auditor’s going concern opinion. Asian Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 14 No.1: 1-19
14.Herliansyah, Yudhi dan Meifida Ilyas. 2006. Pengaruh Pengalaman Auditor terhadap Penggunaan Bukti tidak Relevan dalam auditor judgment, SNA. hal:5.
15.Hoffman, Vicky B., Jennifer R. Joe dan Donald V. Moser. 2003. The Effect of Constrained Processing on Auditors Judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society (28), pp. 699-714.
16.Hughes. 1996. Leadership : Enchancing The Lesson of Experience. pp34
17.Ida. Suraida. 2005. Pengaruh Etika, Kompetensi, Pengalaman Audit dan Risiko Audit terhadap Skeptisisme Profesional Auditor dan Ketepatan Pemberian Opini Akuntan Publik.Salemba Empat. Jakarta.
18.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia. 2001. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Penerbit Salemba Empat.
19.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia . 2007 . Standar Akuntansi Keuangan . Edisi 2007. Penerbit: Salemba Empat . Jakarta
20.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia-Kompartemen Akuntan Publik (IAI-KAP). 2001. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Salemba Empat. Jakarta.
21.Ikhsan, Arfan dan Ghozali,Imam. 2006. Metodologi Penelitian untuk Akuntansi dan Manajemen. Medan : PT. Madju Medan Cipta
22.Indriantoro, Nur., dan Bambang Supomo. 2002. Metodologi Penelitian Bisnis untuk Akuntansi dan Manajemen. Edisi ke-1. BPFE. Yogyakarta.
23.Institut Akuntan Publik Indonesia. 2011. Standar Profesi Akuntan Publik (SPAP). Edisi Mei 2009. Penerbit ikatan Akuntan public Indonesia, Jakarta.
24.Istiana E, Siti. 2010. Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Opinion Shopping, Debt Default Pertumbuhan Perusahaan dan Kondisi Keuangan Perusahaan Terhadap Penerimaan Opini Audit Going Concern. Jurnal Akuntansi & Investasi Vol. 11 No. 1, halaman: 80-96, Yogyakarta.
25.Junaidi dan Hartono, J. 2010. Faktor Non Keuangan Pada Opini Audit Going Concern. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XII.
26.Koh, H.Chye, dan S.S.Tan, 1999. A neural network approach to the prediction of going concern status, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 29 No. 3: 211-216
27.Komalasari, Argianti. 2004. Analisis pengaruh kualitas opini auditor dan proxy going concern terhadap opini auditor. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, Vol. 9 No. 2, Juli: 1-14
28.Lenard, M.Jane, P.Alam, dan D.Booth. 2000. An analysis of Fuzzy Clustering and a hybrid Model for Auditor’s Going Concern Assessment. Journal Decision Sciences (DSI). Fall. Vol. 31, Iss. 4, p. 861.
29.Libby, R., dan K.T,Trotman. 1993. The Review Process as A Control for Differential Recall of Evidence in Auditor Judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 18, no. 6 (June), pp: 559-574.
30.Louwers, T. J. 1998. The Relation Between Going-Concern Opinions and The Auditors' Loss Function, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 36, no. 1 (Spring), pp : 143-156.
31.Marshall, G.A., K. Raghunandan dan D. V. Rama. 1995. Reporting on Going Concern: Before and After SAS No. 59 . The CPA Journal, Vol. 65, no. 8 (August), pp. 52-53.
32.Mayangsari, Sekar. 2003. Pengaruh Keahlian Audit dan Independensi Terhadap Pendapat Audit: Sebuah Kuasi Eksperimen. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Indonesia, Vol. 6 No. 1. Januari: 1-22
33.Praptitorini, Mirna Dyah dan Indira Januarti. 2007. Analisis Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Debt Default, dan Opinion Shopping terhadap Penerimaan Opini Going Concern. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X. Makasar
34.Setyarno, dkk. 2006. Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Kondisi Keuangan Perusahaan, Opini Audit Tahun Sebelumnya, Pertumbuhan Perusahaan terhadap Opini Audit Going Concern. SNA IX. Padang.
35.Simanjuntak, Piter. (2008). Pengaruh Time Budget Pressure dan Resiko Kesalahan terhadap Penurunan Kualitas Audit. Tesis. Universitas Diponegoro Semarang
36.SPAP Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI). 2001. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Jakarta. Salemba Empat
37.Utama, I Gusti Putu Oka Surya dan I Dewa Nyoman Badera. 2016. Penerimaan Opini Audit Dengan Modifikasi Going Concern dan Faktor-Faktor Prediktornya. Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana hal. 893-919. Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Udayana. Bali.
2.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1988. Statement on auditing standards No. 59: the auditor's consideration of an entity's ability to continue as a going concern, New York: AICPA.
3.Asare, S. K. 1992. The Auditor's Going Concern Decision: Interaction of Task Variables and The Sequential Processing of Evidence, The Accounting Review, Vol. 67, no. 2 (April), pp: 379-393.
4.Ashton, A. H. 1991. Experience and Error Frequency Knowledge as Potential Determinants of Audit Expertise, The Accounting Review, Vol. 66, no. 2 (April), pp: 218-239.
5.Chen, K.C dan B.K. Church. 1992. Default on Debt obligations and the Issuance of Going-Concern Report. Auditing: Journal Practice and Theory. Fall.p 30-49.
6.Deangelo, L.E. 1981. Auditor independence, lowballing, and disclosure regulation, Journal of Accounting and Economics: 113-127.
7.Deis, D.R. & Giroux, G.A. (1992). Determinants of Audit Quality in the Public Sector. The Accounting Review, 67, 3, 462-479
8.Fanny, Margaretta dan Sylvia Saputra. 2005. Opini Audit Going Concern: Kajian Berdasarkan Model Prediksi Kebangkrutan, Pertumbuhan Perusahaan, dan Reputasi Kantor Akuntan Publik (Study pada Emiten Bursa Efek Jakarta), Prosiding SNA VIII. Solo
9.Fredrick.V.B.,H.Hoffman, dan R.Libby. 1994. Structure of auditors’ knowledge of financial statement errors. Auditing: A journal of Practice & Theory.
10.Geiger, Marshall dan D.V. Rama, 2006. Audit firm size and going concern reporting accuracy. Accounting Horizons, Vol. 20 No. 1: 1-17
11.Ghozali, Imam. 2009. “Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS “. Semarang : UNDIP
12.Gosh, Aloke dan D.Moon. 2004. Auditor Tenure and Perceptions of Audit Quality, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, (January/March): 209-247
13.Haron, Hasnah., Bambang Hartadi., Mahfooz Ansari, dan Ishak Ismail. 2009. Factors influencing auditor’s going concern opinion. Asian Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 14 No.1: 1-19
14.Herliansyah, Yudhi dan Meifida Ilyas. 2006. Pengaruh Pengalaman Auditor terhadap Penggunaan Bukti tidak Relevan dalam auditor judgment, SNA. hal:5.
15.Hoffman, Vicky B., Jennifer R. Joe dan Donald V. Moser. 2003. The Effect of Constrained Processing on Auditors Judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society (28), pp. 699-714.
16.Hughes. 1996. Leadership : Enchancing The Lesson of Experience. pp34
17.Ida. Suraida. 2005. Pengaruh Etika, Kompetensi, Pengalaman Audit dan Risiko Audit terhadap Skeptisisme Profesional Auditor dan Ketepatan Pemberian Opini Akuntan Publik.Salemba Empat. Jakarta.
18.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia. 2001. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Penerbit Salemba Empat.
19.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia . 2007 . Standar Akuntansi Keuangan . Edisi 2007. Penerbit: Salemba Empat . Jakarta
20.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia-Kompartemen Akuntan Publik (IAI-KAP). 2001. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Salemba Empat. Jakarta.
21.Ikhsan, Arfan dan Ghozali,Imam. 2006. Metodologi Penelitian untuk Akuntansi dan Manajemen. Medan : PT. Madju Medan Cipta
22.Indriantoro, Nur., dan Bambang Supomo. 2002. Metodologi Penelitian Bisnis untuk Akuntansi dan Manajemen. Edisi ke-1. BPFE. Yogyakarta.
23.Institut Akuntan Publik Indonesia. 2011. Standar Profesi Akuntan Publik (SPAP). Edisi Mei 2009. Penerbit ikatan Akuntan public Indonesia, Jakarta.
24.Istiana E, Siti. 2010. Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Opinion Shopping, Debt Default Pertumbuhan Perusahaan dan Kondisi Keuangan Perusahaan Terhadap Penerimaan Opini Audit Going Concern. Jurnal Akuntansi & Investasi Vol. 11 No. 1, halaman: 80-96, Yogyakarta.
25.Junaidi dan Hartono, J. 2010. Faktor Non Keuangan Pada Opini Audit Going Concern. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XII.
26.Koh, H.Chye, dan S.S.Tan, 1999. A neural network approach to the prediction of going concern status, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 29 No. 3: 211-216
27.Komalasari, Argianti. 2004. Analisis pengaruh kualitas opini auditor dan proxy going concern terhadap opini auditor. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, Vol. 9 No. 2, Juli: 1-14
28.Lenard, M.Jane, P.Alam, dan D.Booth. 2000. An analysis of Fuzzy Clustering and a hybrid Model for Auditor’s Going Concern Assessment. Journal Decision Sciences (DSI). Fall. Vol. 31, Iss. 4, p. 861.
29.Libby, R., dan K.T,Trotman. 1993. The Review Process as A Control for Differential Recall of Evidence in Auditor Judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 18, no. 6 (June), pp: 559-574.
30.Louwers, T. J. 1998. The Relation Between Going-Concern Opinions and The Auditors' Loss Function, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 36, no. 1 (Spring), pp : 143-156.
31.Marshall, G.A., K. Raghunandan dan D. V. Rama. 1995. Reporting on Going Concern: Before and After SAS No. 59 . The CPA Journal, Vol. 65, no. 8 (August), pp. 52-53.
32.Mayangsari, Sekar. 2003. Pengaruh Keahlian Audit dan Independensi Terhadap Pendapat Audit: Sebuah Kuasi Eksperimen. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Indonesia, Vol. 6 No. 1. Januari: 1-22
33.Praptitorini, Mirna Dyah dan Indira Januarti. 2007. Analisis Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Debt Default, dan Opinion Shopping terhadap Penerimaan Opini Going Concern. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X. Makasar
34.Setyarno, dkk. 2006. Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Kondisi Keuangan Perusahaan, Opini Audit Tahun Sebelumnya, Pertumbuhan Perusahaan terhadap Opini Audit Going Concern. SNA IX. Padang.
35.Simanjuntak, Piter. (2008). Pengaruh Time Budget Pressure dan Resiko Kesalahan terhadap Penurunan Kualitas Audit. Tesis. Universitas Diponegoro Semarang
36.SPAP Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI). 2001. Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Jakarta. Salemba Empat
37.Utama, I Gusti Putu Oka Surya dan I Dewa Nyoman Badera. 2016. Penerimaan Opini Audit Dengan Modifikasi Going Concern dan Faktor-Faktor Prediktornya. Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana hal. 893-919. Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Udayana. Bali.
Downloads
Published
01-02-2018
How to Cite
Wulandari, R., & Nuryana, I. (2018). OPINION ANALYSIS GOING CONCERN THROUGH AUDITOR QUALITY AND AUDITOR EXPERIENCE. Jurnal Ilmiah Bisnis Dan Ekonomi Asia, 12(1), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.32812/jibeka.v12i1.17
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Jurnal Ilmiah Bisnis dan Ekonomi Asia is Open Access which means makes all of the content of the article in this journal available for free to the public. Any part of the manuscripts in this journal can be downloaded, shared, mixed, reused, and processed by the public. However, they should acknowledge the author and share with the same license selected by the journal manager.
