Referencias

• Altman, E. I. (1982). Accounting implications of failure prediction models. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 6(1), 4–19.
   Google Scholar
• Arnedo, L., Lizarraga, F., y Sánchez, S. (2008). Going-concern uncertainties in pre-bankrupt audit reports: New evidence regarding discretionary accruals and wording ambiguity. International Journal of Auditing, 12(1), 25–44. doi:10.1111/j.1099-1123.2008.00368.x
   Google Scholar
• Bertin, M. A. J., y Iturriaga, F. J. L. (2007). Auditoría y discrecionalidad contable en la gran empresa no financiera española. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting / Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 36(135), 569–594. doi:10.1080/02102412.2007.10779630
   Google Scholar
• Boone, J., Khurana, I., y Raman, K. (2010). Do the Big 4 and the second-tier firms provide audits of similar quality? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 29(4), 330–352. doi:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2010.06.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrnes, N. (2005, agosto 22). The little guys doing large audits. Business Week.
   Google Scholar
• Cano-Rodríguez, M. (2010). Big auditors, private firms and accounting conservatism: Spanish evidence. European Accounting Review, 19(1), 131–159. doi:10.1080/09638180902989426
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carcello, J. V., Hermanson, D. R., y Huss, H. F. (1995). Temporal changes in bankruptcy-related reporting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 14(2), 133–143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, P., Kortum, S., y Moroney, R. (2012). Auditors’ going-concern-modified opinions after 2001: Measuring reporting accuracy. Accounting & Finance, 52(4), 1041–1059. doi:10.1111/j.1467-629X.2011.00436.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, P. J., Geiger, M. A., y O’Connell, B. T. (2008). Costs associated with going-concern modified audit opinions: An analysis of the Australian audit market. Abacus, 44, 61–81. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6281.2007.00249.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, E., Fargher, N., Geiger, M., Lennox, C., Raghunandan, K., y Willekens, M. (2013). Audit reporting for going-concern uncertainty: A research synthesis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(Supplement 1), 353–384. doi:10.2308/ajpt-50324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassell, C. A., Giroux, G., Myers, L., y Omer, T. (2013). The emergence of second-tier auditors in US: Evidence from investor perceptions of financial reporting credibility. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 40(3–4), 350–372.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaney, P., Jeter, D., y Shivakumar, L. (2004). Self-selection of auditors and audit pricing in private firms. The Accounting Review, 79(1), 51–72. doi:10.2308/accr.2004.79.1.51
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, K. C. W., y Church, B. K. (1992). Default on debt obligations and the issuance of going concern opinions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 11(2), 30–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, W., Douthett Jr., E., y Lisic, L. L. (2012). Client importance and audit partner independence. Journal of Accounting Public Policy, 31(3), 320–336. doi:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2011.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, H., y Kallapur, S. (2003). Client importance, non-audit services and abnormal accruals. The Accounting Review, 78, 931−955. doi:10.2308/accr.2003.78.4.931
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citron, D., y Taffler, R. (1992). The audit report under going concern uncertainties: An empirical analysis. Accounting and Business Research, 22(88), 337–345. doi:10.1080/00014788.1992.9729449
   Google Scholar
• DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3, 183–199. doi:10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1
   Google Scholar
• Feldmann, D., y Read, W. (2010). Auditor conservatism after Enron. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 29(1), 267–278. doi:10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.267
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francis, J. R. (2004). What do we know about audit quality? The British Accounting Review, 36, 345–368. doi:10.1016/j.bar.2004.09.003
   Google Scholar
• Francis, J. R., Maydew, E. L., y Sparks, H. C. (1999). The role of Big 6 auditors in the credible reporting of accruals. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18(2), 17–34. doi:10.2308/aud.1999.18.2.17
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuerman, R. D. (2004). Audit quality examined one large CPA firm at a time: Mid-1990’s empirical evidence of a precursor of Arthur Andersen’s collapse. Corporate Ownership & Control, 2, 137−148.
   Google Scholar
• Gaeremynck, A., y Willekens, M. (2003). The endogenous relationship between audit-report type and business termination: Evidence on private firms in a non-litigious environment. Journal of Accounting and Business Research, 33(1), 65–79. doi:10.1080/00014788.2003.9729632
   Google Scholar
• Geiger, M., y Raghunandan, K. (2002). Going-concern opinions in the new legal environment. Accounting Horizons, 16(1), 17–26. doi:10.2308/acch.2002.16.1.17
   Google Scholar
• Geiger, M., Raghunandan, K., y Rama, D. V. (2005). Recent changes in the association between bankruptcies and prior audit opinions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 24, 21–35. doi:10.2308/aud.2005.24.1.21
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geiger, M., y Rama, D. (2006). Audit firm size and going-concern reporting accuracy. Accounting Horizons, 20(1), 1–17. doi:10.2308/acch.2006.20.1.1
   Google Scholar
• Geiger, M. A., Raghunandan, K., y Rama, D. V. (1998). A note on going-concern modified audit reports and subsequent bankruptcies before and after SAS No. 59. Accounting Enquiries, 8 (1), 1–34.
   Google Scholar
• Ghicas, D., Papadaki, A., Siougle, G., y Sougiannis, T. (2008). The relevance of quantifiable audit qualifications in the valuation of IPOs. Review of Accounting Studies, 13, 512–550. doi:10.1007/s11142-007-9051-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, W. H. (1998). Análisis econométrico. Madrid: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hope, O., y Langli, J. C. (2010). Auditor independence in a private firm and low litigation risk setting. The Accounting Review, 85(2), 573–605. doi:10.2308/accr.2010.85.2.573
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopwood, W., McKeown, J. C., y Mutchler, J. F. (1989). A test of the incremental explanatory power of opinions qualified for consistency and uncertainty. The Accounting Review, 64(1), 28–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopwood, W. J., McKeown, J. C., y Mutchler, J. F. (1994). A reexamination of auditor versus model accuracy within the context of the going-concern opinion decision. Contemporary Accounting Research, 10(2), 409–431. doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.1994.tb00400.x
   Google Scholar
• Jeong, S. W., y Rho, J. (2004). Big six auditors and audit quality: The Korean evidence. The International Journal of Accounting, 39, 175–196. doi:10.1016/j.intacc.2004.02.001
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, S. E., y Williams, D. D. (2012). The changing relationship between audit firm size and going concern reporting. Accounting, Organization and Society, 37, 322–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khurana, I. K., y Raman, K. K. (2004). Litigation risk and the financial reporting credibility of Big 4 versus non-Big 4 audits: Evidence from Anglo-American countries. The Accounting Review, 79(2), 473–495. doi:10.2308/accr.2004.79.2.473
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishnan, J., y Schauer, P. (2000). The differentiation of quality among auditors: Evidence from the not-for-profit sector. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 19(2), 9–25. doi:10.2308/aud.2000.19.2.9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., y Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. The Journal of Finance, 54, 471–517. doi:10.1111/0022-1082.00115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., y Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and finance. The Journal of Political Economy, 106(6), 1113–1150. doi:10.1086/250042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, A., Minutti-Meza, M., y Zhang, P. (2011). Can Big 4 versus non-Big 4 differences in audit-quality proxies be attributed to client characteristics? The Accounting Review, 86(1), 259–286. doi:10.2308/accr.00000009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lennox, C. (1999). Are large auditors more accurate than small auditors? Accounting and Business Research, 29(3), 217–227. doi:10.1080/00014788.1999.9729582
   Google Scholar
• Lennox, C. (2000). Going concern opinions in failing companies: Auditor dependence and opinion shopping. WP SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.240468
   Google Scholar
• Li, C. (2009). Does client importance affect auditor independence at the office level? Empirical evidence from going-concern opinions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26, 201–230. doi:10.1506/car.26.1.7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKeown, J. C., Mutchler, J. F., y Hopwood, W. (1991). Towards an explanation of auditor failure to modify the audit opinions of bankrupt companies. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 10(Supplement), 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Monterrey, J., y Sánchez, A. (2008). Gobierno corporativo, conflictos de agencia y elección de auditor. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, XXXVII(137), 113–156.
   Google Scholar
• Mutchler, J. F. (1984). Auditors’ perceptions of the going-concern opinion decision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 3(Spring), 17–29.
   Google Scholar
• Mutchler, J. F., Hopwood, W., y Mckeown, J. (1997). The influence of contrary information and mitigating factors on audit opinion decisions on bankrupt companies. Journal of Accounting Research, 35, 295–310. doi:10.2307/2491367
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navarro García, J. C. N., y Conesa, M. I. M. (2004). Manipulación contable y calidad del auditor. Un estudio empírico de la realidad española. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting / Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 33(123), 1025–1061. doi:10.1080/02102412.2004.10779538
   Google Scholar
• Palmrose, Z. V. (1988). An analysis of auditor litigation and audit service quality. The Accounting Review, 63(1), 55–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pittman, J. A., y Fortin, S. (2004). Auditor choice and the cost of debt capital for newly public firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 37, 113–136. doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2003.06.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pryor, C., y Terza, J. (2002). Are going concern audit opinions a self-fulfilling prophecy? Advances in Quantitative Analysis of Finance and Accounting, 10, 89–116.
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds, J. K., y Francis, J. R. (2001). Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 30, 375–400. doi:10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00010-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Barbadillo, E., Gómez-Aguilar, N., De Fuentes-Barberá, C. D., y García-Benau, M. A. (2004). Audit quality and the going-concern decision-making process: Spanish evidence. European Accounting Review, 13(4), 597–620. doi:10.1080/0963818042000216820
   Google Scholar
• Sun, L. (2006). A re-evaluation of auditors’ opinions versus statistical models in bankruptcy prediction. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 28(1), 55–78. doi:10.1007/s11156-006-0003-x
   Google Scholar
• Van Tendeloo, B., y Vanstraelen, A. (2008). Earnings management and audit quality in Europe: Evidence from the private client segment market. European Accounting Review, 17(3), 447–469. doi:10.1080/09638180802016684
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vander Bauwhede, H., y Willekens, M. (2004). Evidence on (the lack of) audit-quality differentiation in the private client segment of the Belgian audit market. European Accounting Review, 13(3), 501–522. doi:10.1080/0963818042000237106
   Google Scholar
• Xu, Y., Jiang, A. L., Fargher, N., y Carson, E. (2011). Audit reports in Australia during the global financial crisis. Australian Accounting Review, 21(1), 22–31. doi:10.1111/j.1835-2561.2010.00118.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zmijewski, M. (1984). Methodological issues related to the estimation of financial distress prediction models. Journal of Accounting Research, 22(Supplement), 59–82. doi:10.2307/2490859
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar