Audit Expectation Gap: A Bibliometric Analysis Based on Scopus And WoS Data (1992-2024)

Abstract

In this study, the concept of the expectation gap (AEG), which is thought to be at the center of the criticism towards the audit profession, is discussed. The AEG can be explained as the difference between the performances and expectations of the parties to the audit. The aim of the study is to examine the current status and global trends of AEG scientific publications in Scopus and Web of Science databases with bibliometric analysis. For this purpose, in the search conducted with the keyword "Audit Expectation Gap" in both databases, 117 publications covering the years 1992-2024 were evaluated comparatively. The data were analysed by using Excel and VOSviewer programs. The findings show that approximately 40 per cent of AEG research has been conducted in the last five years. The leading countries are the United Kingdom, Australia, Malaysia and Iran. The most productive authors are Humphrey, C., Coram, P. J. and Lee, T.H. The common keywords that stand out are auditing, auditors, auditor’s report, key audit matters and audit quality. The overlap rate of the databases is 35% and the coverage of Scopus was found to be wider. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the effects/interactions of AEG research in terms of both databases. Keywords: Audit, Expectation Gap, Bibliometric Analysis, Scopus, WoS, VOSviewer JEL Codes: M42, C88

Keywords

• Audit
• Expectation Gap
• Bibliometric Analysis
• Scopus
• WoS
• VOSviewer

References

1. Adeyemi, S. B., & Uadiale, O. M. (2011). An empirical investigation of the audit expectation gap (AEG) in Nigeria.
2. Agustí, M. A. & Orta-Pérez, M. (2022). Big data and artificial intelligence in the fields of accounting and auditing: A bibliometric analysis. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting/Revista Española De Financiación Y Contabilidad, 1-27.
3. Akther, T., & Xu, F. (2020). Existence of the audit expectation gap and its impact on stakeholders’ confidence: The moderating role of the financial reporting council. International Journal of Financial Studies, 8(1), 4.
4. Aytaç, A. & Gençoğlu, Ü. G. (2020). Key audit matters: A perspective based on bibliometric analysis. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 22(3), 547-562.
5. Baron, C. D., Johnson, D. A., Searfoss, D. G. & Smith, C. H. (1977). Uncovering corporate irregularities: are we closeing the expectation gap? Journal of Accountancy (pre- 1986), 144(000004), 56.
6. Behrend, J., Eulerich, M., & Wood, D. A. (2022). The Intellectual Structure of Audit Committee Research: A Bibliometric Analysis (1969–2020). Available at SSRN 3496040. http://Dx.Doi.Org/10.2139/Ssrn.3496040
7. Best, P. J., Buckby, S., & Tan, C. (2001). Evidence of the audit expectation gap in Singapore. Managerial Auditing Journal, 16(3), 134-144.
8. Broadus, R. N. (1987). Toward a definition of “bibliometrics” scientometrics, Vol. 12. Nos 5-6, 373-379. Access address: https://link.springer.com/content/ pdf/10.1007/BF02016680.pdf, 16.09.2022.

9. Campbell, D. R. & Michenzi, A. R. (1987). Revising the audit report: A response to the expectation gap. The CPA Journal, New York Vol. 57, Iss. 4:34.
10. Ciger, A. (2020). Audit quality: A bibliometric analysis (1981-2020). Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, 67(4), 473-494.
11. Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting. (2018). Access address: https://www.kgk.gov.tr/, 14.05.2024.
12. Cohen Commission (1978). Report of the commission on auditors’ responsibilities; conclusions and recommendations, New York: American Institute of
13. Certified Public Accountants. Access address: https:// egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_assoc/433 16.09.2022.
14. Cruceana, A. C. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of the audit quality at global level. Accounting and Management Information Systems (AMIS), 316-331.
15. Deepal, A. G., & Jayamaha, A. (2022). Audit expectation gap: a comprehensive literature review. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 7(3), 308-319.
16. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296.
17. Dönmez, G., Tosunoğlu, B., & Cengiz, S. (2020). Bağımsız denetim kalitesi konusunda ulusal ve uluslararası dergiler üzerine bibliyometrik bir araştırma. The Journal of International Scientific Researches, 5(Ek), 78-86.
18. Enago Akademi. (2021). Popüler veri tabanları hakkında hızlı kılavuz. Access address: https://www. enago.com.tr/academy/popular-databases-forresearchers/?ga=2.84549853. 594312023.1634629811- 217887020.1631020895-8798258#, 14.05.2024.
19. Fotoh, L. E., & Lorentzon, J. I. (2023). Audit digitalization and its consequences on the audit expectation gap: A critical perspective. Accounting Horizons, 37(1), 43-69.
20. Gold, A., Gronewold, U., & Pott, C. (2012). The ISA 700 auditor’s report and the audit expectation gap– Do explanations matter?. International Journal of Auditing, 16(3), 286- 307.
21. Gonthier‐Besacier, N., Hottegindre, G., & Fine‐Falcy, S. (2016). Audit Quality Perception: Beyond the ‘Role‐ Perception Gap’. International Journal of Auditing, 20(2), 186-201.
22. Gray, G. L., Turner, J. L., Coram, P. J., & Mock, T. J. (2011). Perceptions and misperceptions regarding the unqualified auditor’s report by financial statement preparers, users, and auditors. Accounting Horizons, 25(4), 659-684.
23. Keleş, D. (2022). İç denetim konusundaki uluslararası çalışmaların görsel ağ haritalaması destekli bibliyometrik analizi. Uşak Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 42-58.
24. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10- 25.
25. Kurbanova, M., & Cavlak, H. (2021). Blokzincir ve denetim alanındaki makalelerin bibliyometrik analizi. Tide Academia Research, 3(2), 213-246.
26. Lee, T. H., Gloeck, J. D., & Palaniappan, A. K. (2007). The audit expectation gap: an empirical study in Malaysia. Southern African Journal of Accountability and Auditing Research, 7(1), 1-15.
27. Liggio, C. D. (1974). The expectation gap: the accountant’s waterloo. Journal of Contemporary Business, Vol. 3, No. 3, ss. 27-44.
28. Lin, Z. J., & Chen, F. (2004). An empirical study of audit ‘expectation gap’in the People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Auditing, 8(2), 93-115.
29. Maggiorani, M. (2022). A systematic and bibliometric review of the audit quality in the public sector. International Journal of Business Innovation, 1(1), e27682. https://doi.org/10.34624/ijbi.v1i1.27682
30. Marques, R.P. & Santos, C. (2017). Sürekli denetim üzerine araştırma: bibliyometrik bir analiz. 12th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI). Ieee. Doi: 10.23919/ CISTI.2017.7976048
31. McEnroe, J. E., & Martens, S. C. (2001). Auditors’ and investors’ perceptions of the “expectation gap”. Accounting Horizons, 15(4), 345-358
32. Moroney, R., Campbell, F. & Hamilton J. (2017). Auditing: a practical approach. 3rd Edition, John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
33. Olojede, P., Erin, O., Asiriuwa, O., & Usman, M. (2020). Audit expectation gap: an empirical analysis. Future Business Journal, 6, 1-12.
34. Öztürk, S. & Yılmaz, C. (2018). Denetim ve adli muhasebe alanındaki çalışmaların bibliyometrik analiz tekniği ile incelenmesi. Karadeniz Uluslararası Bilimsel Dergi, 39(39), 173-188.
35. Özçelik, M. (2022). Muhasebe ve denetim alanında bilgi uçurma (whıstleblowıng) niyetini etkileyen faktörler: bibliyometrik ve sistematik bir analiz. Sayıştay Dergisi, 33(125), 257- 289.
36. Pierce, B. & Kilcommins, M. (1996). The audit expectations gap: the role of auditing education, DCU Business School Research Paper Series, Paper No. 13, ss.3.
37. Pizzi, S., Venturelli, A., Variale, M., & Macario, G. P. (2021). Assessing The İmpacts Of Digital Transformation On İnternal Auditing: A Bibliometric Analysis. Technology in Society, 67, 101738.
38. Porter, B. (1993). An empirical study of the audit expectation-performance gap. Accounting and business research, 24(93), 49-68.
39. Pourheydari, O., & Abousaiedi, M. (2011). An empirical investigation of the audit expectations gap in Iran. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 2(1), 63- 76.
40. Pranckutė, Raminta. “Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world.” Publications 9.1 (2021): 12.
41. Pritchard, A., & Wittig, G. R. (1981). Bibliometrics. Watford: AllM Books.
42. Ruhnke, K., & Schmidt, M. (2014). The audit expectation gap: existence, causes, and the impact of changes. Accounting and Business research, 44(5), 572-601.
43. Salehi, M. (2007). Reasonableness of Audit Expectation Gap: Possible Approach to Reducing. ICFAI Journal of Audit Practice, 4(3).
44. Salehi, M., Mansoury, A., & Azary, Z. (2009). Audit independence and expectation gap: Empirical evidences from Iran. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 1(1), 165-174.
45. Salehi, M. (2011), Audit expectation gap: Concept, nature and trace, African Journal of Business Management Vol. 5(21), pp. 8376-8392, 23 September, http://www. academicjournals.org/AJBM
46. Salehi, M., Jahanbin, F., & Adibian, M. S. (2020). The relationship between audit components and audit expectation gap in listed companies on the Tehran stock exchange. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 18(1), 199-222.
47. Sánchez, A. D., Del Río, M. D. L. C., & García, J. Á. (2017). Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(1), 8-15.
48. Secinaro, S., Dal Mas, F., Brescia, V. & Calandra, D. (2021). Blockchain in the accounting, auditing and accountability fields: A bibliometric and coding analysis. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.
49. Singh, V. K., Singh, P., Karmakar, M., Leta, J., & Mayr, P. (2021). The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 126, 5113-5142.
50. Sikka, P., Puxty, A., Willmott, H., & Cooper, C. (1998). The impossibility of eliminating the expectations gap: some theory and evidence. Critical perspectives on accounting, 9(3), 299-330.
51. Silva, R., Inácio, H., & Marques, R. P. (2022). Blockchain İmplications For Auditing: A Systematic Literature Review And Bibliometric Analysis. The International Journal Of Digital Accounting Research, 22(28), 163- 192.
52. Taki, M., Rahmawati R., Bandi B., Payamta P. & Rusydiana, A.S. (2021). Audit Quality Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Library Philosophy And Practice (Ejournal).
53. Turkish Accounting Standarts (TAS). Presentation of Financial Statements. Access address: https://www. kgk.gov.tr/, 14.05.2024.
54. Web of Science Core Collection Citation Report. (2024). Access address: https://www.webofscience.com/ wos/woscc/basic-search?state=%7B%7D
55. Web of Science Core Collection (2024). Access address: https://www.webofscience.com//wos/woscc/basicsearch?state=%7B%7D
56. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2011). Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1109.2058,https://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.1109.2058
57. Van Leeuwen, T. (2004). Descriptive versus evaluative bibliometrics. Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems, 373-388.
58. Yan, L., & Zhiping, W. (2023). Mapping the literature on academic publishing: a bibliometric analysis on WOS. Sage Open, 13(1), 21582440231158562.
59. Yuan, X. E., & Liu, Y. (2016, August). Causes and Control of Dynamic Audit Expectation Gap. In 3d International Conference on Applied Social Science Research (ICASSR 2015) (pp. 424-426). Atlantis Press.