本文關(guān)鍵詞： 媒體監(jiān)督 聲譽(yù)機(jī)制 審計(jì)意見　出處：《西北大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：媒體監(jiān)督作為一種非正式的外部治理機(jī)制,被譽(yù)為獨(dú)立于立法、司法、行政體系之外的“第四方權(quán)利”,發(fā)揮著“經(jīng)濟(jì)警察”的作用,其公司治理效應(yīng)已獲得國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者的一致認(rèn)可。目前為止,國(guó)內(nèi)鮮有文獻(xiàn)研究媒體監(jiān)督對(duì)于審計(jì)意見的影響作用,已有文獻(xiàn)均是從媒體監(jiān)督量化(次數(shù))的角度出發(fā)去探討二者之間的關(guān)系,而本文將從媒體負(fù)面報(bào)道的次數(shù)、廣泛度以及深度分別研究其對(duì)審計(jì)意見的影響。其次,事務(wù)所聲譽(yù)機(jī)制在西方相對(duì)完善的法律制度和成熟的資本市場(chǎng)環(huán)境下發(fā)揮著顯著的作用,國(guó)外學(xué)者已對(duì)此做了一定的研究;而我國(guó)由于相關(guān)法律制度還不完善,資本市場(chǎng)起步相對(duì)較晚,事務(wù)所聲譽(yù)機(jī)制的治理效應(yīng)在學(xué)術(shù)界仍存在爭(zhēng)議。本文將選取2009-2015年A股上市公司作為樣本對(duì)以上問題展開研究,結(jié)果表明:媒體對(duì)于上市公司負(fù)面報(bào)道的次數(shù)越多,審計(jì)師出具非標(biāo)準(zhǔn)審計(jì)意見的概率則越大;媒體對(duì)于上市公司負(fù)面報(bào)道的廣泛度越高,審計(jì)師出具非標(biāo)準(zhǔn)審計(jì)意見的概率則越大;媒體對(duì)于上市公司的負(fù)面報(bào)道越深入,審計(jì)師出具非標(biāo)準(zhǔn)審計(jì)意見的概率則越大。而媒體負(fù)面報(bào)道與事務(wù)所聲譽(yù)機(jī)制的交乘項(xiàng)不顯著,說(shuō)明事務(wù)所聲譽(yù)機(jī)制目前在中國(guó)尚未發(fā)揮顯著作用。該結(jié)論為現(xiàn)有研究做了一定的補(bǔ)充;在此基礎(chǔ)上,本文分析了這一結(jié)果產(chǎn)生的原因,并提出了相關(guān)的政策建議。
[Abstract]:As an informal external governance mechanism, media supervision is regarded as the "fourth party right" independent of the legislative, judicial and administrative systems, which plays the role of "economic police". The effect of corporate governance has been unanimously recognized by domestic and foreign scholars. So far, there is little literature on the impact of media supervision on audit opinion. The existing literature is from the media supervision quantitative (frequency) perspective to explore the relationship between the two, and this paper will be from the number of negative media reports. Secondly, the reputation mechanism of the firm plays a significant role in the relatively perfect legal system and mature capital market environment in the West. Foreign scholars have done some research on this; However, because the relevant legal system is not perfect, the capital market starts relatively late in our country. The governance effect of firm reputation mechanism is still controversial in academic circles. This paper will select A-share listed companies from 2009-2015 as a sample to study the above issues. The results show that the more negative reports the media have for listed companies, the greater the probability of auditors issuing non-standard audit opinions; The higher the extent of negative reports of listed companies, the greater the probability of auditors issuing non-standard audit opinions; The more in-depth the negative reports of the listed companies, the greater the probability of auditors issuing non-standard audit opinions. However, the number of negative media reports and the reputation mechanism of firms is not significant. It shows that the mechanism of firm reputation has not played a significant role in China at present. On this basis, this paper analyzes the causes of this result, and puts forward relevant policy recommendations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：G206;F239.4
，

本文編號(hào)：1477722