The Expectation Gap In The Legal System: Perception Differences Between Auditors And Judges

Abstract

The expectation gap, and its related effects on auditor legal liability, has been presumed to be caused by diverging perceptions by the auditing profession and third party litigants regarding the professions role, responsibilities, and related performance. Prior research regarding the expectation gap has focused on diverging perceptions of different groups (i.e. financial analysts, bank loan officers, small business owners, and auditors). While this research has identified an expectation gap between auditors and certain third-parties, it has neglected examining the perceptions of judicial litigants. This absence is somewhat ironic given the current auditor legal liability situation. This study fills this void by comparing judges and auditors attitudes toward the auditing profession. Results revealed a large divergence in perceptions of auditors and judges regarding their expectations of the auditing profession.