We use experimental markets to examine whether providing consulting services to a non‐audit client impacts audit quality. Our paper directly addresses concerns raised by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board that the largest public accounting firms’ growth in their consulting practices threatens audit quality. We conduct an experiment proposed using a registration‐based editorial process. We compare a baseline where the auditor does not provide consulting services to conditions where auditors provide consulting to audit clients or where auditors only provide consulting services to non‐audit clients. Our unique design provides evidence on whether providing consulting to non‐audit clients strengthens the salience of a client‐cooperative social norm that reduces audit quality. We do not find differences in audit quality by condition in our planned analysis, however we find greater variation in audit quality in the conditions where auditors provide consulting services compared to the baseline. In unplanned analyses, our results suggest providing consulting services increases auditor cooperation with managers, increasing audit quality when managers prefer high audit quality and decreasing audit quality when managers prefer low audit quality.

Guided by the performance feedback literature, we study PCAOB inspections as a nonstandard feedback event. We use an experiential questionnaire to collect and analyze perceptions, reactions, and responses to inspection feedback from 120 partners and managers subject to a recent PCAOB inspection. Despite varying perceptions, we find on average auditors perceive strong firm support but also that firms acquiesce to inspectors. Generally, the feedback source, inspectors, are perceived as professional, organized, and knowledgeable and auditors agree with the feedback message, perceiving it as consistent and well reasoned. We observe a range of auditor reactions (satisfaction with and motivated to use inspection feedback), responses at the engagement level (improvements to audit quality and inspection risk or impression management), and individual responses. Multivariate analyses show more positive feedback perceptions improve reactions, which enhance desirability of responses and are robust to considering the inspection outcome, offering insights for refining inspection interactions and processes.

This study uses experimental economic markets to investigate the impact of risk and the potential for loss on managers' demand for audit quality. We posit that these two important contextual factors influence managers' audit quality preferences. We study these factors because they are ubiquitous to companies, and we focus on their influence on managers because managers continue to play a significant role in the auditor hiring process and we know relatively little about their auditor preferences. We predict that risk, the potential for loss, and their interaction will each decrease manager demand for high audit quality due to a desire to achieve greater reporting flexibility. Experimental results are consistent with our predictions; specifically, increased risk, the potential for loss, and to a lesser extent their interaction, significantly reduce managers' likelihood of hiring the best available auditor in the market. Path analysis indicates that this reduction in audit quality demand leads to increases in misreporting. Finally, we observe investors overpaying for assets to a greater extent when managers hire lower‐quality auditors. Our results show that the contextual factors of risk and the potential for loss, which are ubiquitous to companies, can reduce demand for audit quality, which can increase misreporting behavior and ultimately harm investors.