This paper briefly traces the evolution of the impact that activities of accounting regulatory bodies have had on financial accounting research during the last two decades. It analyzes the continuing erosion of the link between accounting research and regulations and the adverse effect of that erosion on empirical studies. Regulators, authors and editors of scholarly accounting journals may share responsibility for this trend. Some suggestions are offered on how to reverse this trend and how to better link empirical and analytical studies to some of the concerns which motivated earlier studies. Policy makers may then be provided with evidence to support their regulatory activities. Résumé. L'auteur retrace brièvement l'évolution des répercussions qu'ont eues les activités des organismes de réglementation de la comptabilité sur la recherche en comptabilité financière depuis deux décennies. Il analyse l'érosion progressive du lien entre la recherche et la réglementation comptable et l'incidence négative de cette érosion sur les études empiriques. Les responsables de la réglementation, les auteurs et les directeurs de revues spécialisées en comptabilité peuvent partager la responsabilité de cette tendance. L'auteur offre certaines suggestions relatives à la façon de renverser cette tendance et de mieux lier les études empiriques et analytiques à certaines des préoccupations qui ont motivé les recherches antérieures. Ainsi les responsables de la formulation de politiques disposerontils de documents sur lesquels appuyer leurs activités de réglementation.

In this study, we use experimental markets to assess the effect of the Security and Exchange Commission's (SEC's) new independence rule on investors' perceptions of independence, investors' payoff distributions, and market prices. The new rule requires client firms to disclose in their annual proxy statements the amount of nonaudit fees paid to their auditors. The new disclosure is intended to inform investors of auditors' incentives to compromise their independence. Our experimental design is a 2 3 between‐subjects design, where we control the presence (unbiased reports) or absence of auditor independence in fact (biased reports). While independence in fact was not immediately observable to investors, we controlled for independence in appearance by varying the public disclosure of the extent of nonaudit services provided by the auditor to the client. In one market setting, investors were not given any information about whether the auditor provided such nonaudit services; in a second setting, investors were explicitly informed that the auditor did not provide any non‐audit services; and in a third setting, investors were told that the auditor provided nonaudit services that could be perceived to have an adverse effect on independence in fact. We found that disclosures of nonaudit services reduced the accuracy of investors' beliefs of auditors' independence in fact when independence in appearance was inconsistent with independence in fact. This then caused prices of assets to deviate more from their economic predictions (lower market efficiency) in the inconsistent settings relative to the no‐disclosure and consistent settings. Thus, disclosures of fees for nonaudit services could reduce the efficiency of capital markets if such disclosures result in investors forming inaccurate beliefs of auditor independence in fact ‐ that is, auditors appear independent but they are not independent in fact, or vice versa. The latter is the maintained position of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), which argued against the new rule. Further research is needed to assess the degree of correspondence between independence in fact and independence in appearance.

We experimentally investigate the effects of a mandatory increase in education on the market for professional labor services when several service qualities are assumed to exist. We show that when suppliers have insufficient incentives to offer high‐quality services in a free market, an increase in mandatory education can improve the coordination of supplier decisions and increase efficiency. If suppliers voluntarily provide a sufficient quantity of high‐quality services, an education constraint can have the opposite effect. In both instances, however, an increase in the mandatory level of education can be expected to reduce the price of high‐quality services while increasing the price of lower service qualities. Résumé. Les auteurs ont procédé à une analyse expérimentale des conséquences qu'aurait une hausse imposée du niveau d'études sur le marché des services professionnels, si l'on suppose l'existence de plusieurs qualités de services. L'analyse démontre que lorsque les stimulants sont insuffisants pour inciter les fournisseurs à offrir des services professionnels de qualité supérieure dans un marché libre, une hausse imposée du niveau d'études peut améliorer la coordination des décisions des fournisseurs et augmenter l'efficience. Si toutefois les fournisseurs offrent de leur propre chef une quantité suffisante de services de qualité supérieure, le fait d'imposer un niveau d'études supérieur peut avoir l'effet contraire. Dans les deux cas, on peut s'attendre à ce qu'une hausse du niveau d'études obligatoire réduise le prix des services de qualité supérieure tout en augmentant le prix des services de qualité plus faible.

In this paper, we examine the relative efficiency of audit production by one of the then Big 6 public accounting firms for a sample of 247 geographically dispersed audits of U.S. companies performed in 1989. To test the relative efficiency of audit production, we use both stochastic frontier estimation (SFE) and data envelopment analysis (DEA). A feature of our research is that we also test whether any apparent inefficiencies in production, identified using SFE and DEA, are correlated with audit pricing. That is, do apparent inefficiencies cause the public accounting firm to reduce its unit price (billing rate) per hour of labor utilized on an engagement? With respect to results, we do not find any evidence of relative (within‐sample) inefficiencies in the use of partner, manager, senior, or staff labor hours using SFE. This suggests that the SFE model may not be sufficiently powerful to detect inefficiencies, even with our reasonably large sample size. However, we do find apparent inefficiencies using the DEA model. Audits range from about 74 percent to 100 percent relative efficiency in production, while the average audit is produced at about an 88 percent efficiency level, relative to the most efficient audits in the sample. Moreover, the inefficiencies identified using DEA are correlated with the firm's realization rate. That is, average billing rates per hour fall as the amount of inefficiency increases. Our results suggest that there are moderate inefficiencies in the production of many of the subject public accounting firm's audits, and that such inefficiencies are economically costly to the firm.