THE EFFECT OF FINANCIAL DISTRESS AND SPECIALIZATION OF AUDITOR INDUSTRY ON AUDIT DELAY
Abstract
Several previous studies on audit delay show different results. Therefore, other research needs to be done to reexamine theories about audit delay. This research is a quantitative approach. The sample in this study was selected based on the Purposive Sampling method. Samples were obtained from thirty-one manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange with observations for five years, so that the selected sample was 155 samples. This research method uses the formula of multiple linear regression analysis, classic assumption test, hypothesis test. Data analysis using descriptive statistics with the help of SPSS 24 software. The results of this study indicate that financial distress has no effect on audit delay and auditor industry specialization has an effect on audit delay.
Keywords: Audit Delay, Financial Distress, Specialization of Auditor Industry
References
Benazic, M. (2006), “Fiscal Policy & Economic Activity in Croatia with A Cointegration Analysisâ€, Ekonomski pregled, 57(12), pp. 882-917.
Gray, et, a l. (2007), Fiscal policy & economic growth - Lessons for Eastern Europe & Central Asia, The WB.
Johansen, S., (1988), “Statistical analysis of vector cointegrationâ€, Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 12, 231-
Johansen & Juselius (1990), “Maximum likelihood estimation & inference on cointegration - with applications to the demand for moneyâ€, Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Oxford Univ. 52, 169-210,
Granger, C.W.J. (1969), â€Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models & Cross Spectral Methodsâ€, Econometrica, 37, str. 424-438.
Engle & Granger (1987), “Co-integration & ECM: representation, estimation, and testingâ€, In Econometrica Book, 55, 251-
Narayan (2005), “The saving & investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration testsâ€, Applied Economics, 37, 1979–1990,
Narayan & Smyth (2008), “Energy consumption & real GDP in G7 countries: new evidence from panel cointegration with structural breaksâ€, in journal Energy Economics, 30, 2331– 2341,
Narayan & Prasad (2008), “Electricity consumption real GDP causality nexus: evidence from a bootstrapped causality test in OECD countriesâ€, in journal Energy Policy, 36, 910– 918.
Pesaran, at, al (2001). Bounds Testing Approaches to the Analysis of Level Relationships; In Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 16, pp. 289–326
Rukelj, D. (2009), Modelling Fiscal & Monetary Policy Interactions in Croatia Using SVEC Model, Privredna kretanja i ekonomska politika 121, pp. 27-58.
Svaljek et, al. (2009), Ciklicki prilagodjeni proracunski saldo: primjer Hrvatske. Privredna kretanja i ekonomska politika 120, pp. 49-81,
Samuelson. Pul A. & William D. Nordhaus, Microeconomics (2001), New York The McGraw-Hill Company, Inc.
McEachern, William A (2000) Ekonomi Makro Pendekatan Kontemporer. Edisi Indonesia, Salemba Empat, Jakarta.
Slavin, Stephen L. (1999), Macroeconomics 5th edition. New York, The McGraw-Hill Company.
Begg, David, Stanley Fischer, & Rudiger Dornbusch (2001) Principles of Macroenonomics 2nd Edition, USA: Harcourt College Publishers.
Mankiw, Gregory. N. (2005). Makroekonomi, Edisi Kelima: Erlangga. Jakarta.
Pesaran & Shin (1999), “ARDL modelling approach to cointegration analysisâ€, in: S.Storm (Ed.) Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century: The Ragnar Frisch
