臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究以台灣2010年至2014年上市（櫃）公司為研究樣本，以會計主管異動作為調節變數，來檢驗財務槓桿與繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之間的關係，是否會因會計主管異動而有所差異。另本研究更進一步將受查公司細分為潛在財務困難公司與財務健全公司，以檢驗財務困難與繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之間的關係，是否亦會因會計主管異動而有所差異。實證結果發現，財務槓桿與繼續經營有疑慮審計意見具有正向關係，顯示當受查公司財務槓桿愈高，會計師簽發繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之機率愈大。然而，會計主管異動對財務槓桿與繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之間的關係並無調節效果。本研究更進一步發現，潛在財務困難公司與繼續經營有疑慮審計意見具有正向關係，顯示會計師對於潛在財務困難公司會增加簽發繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之可能。但當潛在財務困難公司之會計主管發生異動時，會計師降低簽發繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之可能性，代表會計主管異動對財務困難與繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之間的關係具有負向效果。

The study collects companies’ financial data and auditors’ data of publicly traded companies listed in Taiwan Stock Exchange and Gre-Tai Securities Market in Taiwan from year 2010 to 2014. I incorporate accounting manager turnover into regression model to examine whether accounting manager turnover has a moderating effect on the relationship between financial leverage and going concern opinions. Moreover, I divide the audit clients into companies of potential financial distress and healthy companies and examine whether accounting manager turnover also has a moderating effect on the relationship between financial distress and going concern opinions.
The empirical results show that financial leverage is positively associated with going concern opinions, representing that CPAs are more likely to issue going concern opinion when audit clients have higher financial leverage. Beside, financial distress is positively associated with going concern opinions, representing that audit clients with potential financial distress are more likely to receive going concern opinion issued by CPAs. I also find the coefficient of interaction between financial distress and accounting manager turnover is significantly negative, which implies accounting manager turnover may have a moderating effect on the relationship between financial distress and going concern opinions.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 本研究架構 3
第四節 本研究流程 4
第五節 預期貢獻 5
第二章 研究文獻與假說發展 6
第一節 繼續經營有疑慮審計意見 6
第二節 財務槓桿 8
第三節 會計主管異動 10
第四節 潛在財務困難公司 12
第三章 研究方法 14
第一節 樣本選取與資料來源 14
第二節 模型建立與變數衡量 17
第四章 實證結果與分析 25
第一節 敘述性統計與t檢定 25
第二節 變數相關係數分析 34
第三節 迴歸分析 36
第五章 結論與建議 44
第一節 結論 44
第二節 研究限制與建議 45
參考文獻 47
一、中文文獻 47
二、英文文獻 48

表目錄
表1 樣本篩選過程 15
表2 樣本產業分佈 16
表3 變數衡量及預期符號相關彙總表 24
表4-1 敘述性統計 26
續表4-1 敘述性統計 27
表4-2 審計意見變數t檢定結果－（虛擬變數）29
表4-3 財務狀況變數t檢定結果－（虛擬變數）31
表4-4 會計主管異動變數t檢定結果－（虛擬變數）33
表5 各變數的相關係數矩陣 35
表6 財務槓桿與會計主管異動對繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之影響 37
表7 財務槓桿與會計主管異動對繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之影響
（潛在財務困難公司）39
表8 財務困難與會計主管異動對繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之影響 41
表9 財務困難與會計主管異動對繼續經營有疑慮審計意見之影響
（潛在財務困難公司及財務健全公司）43

圖目錄
圖1 研究流程 4

一、中文文獻
1.尤虹惠，2008，我國企業高階主管人事異動與企業績效關聯性之研究，國立高雄應用科技大學國際
企業研究所碩士論文。
2.李智雯，2000，運用現金流量資訊預測企業財務危機之實證研究，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論
文。
3.林清揚，2001，如何修正商業會計法以提升商業會計資訊品質，中原大學會計研究所碩士論文。
4.吳清在與鄭莉，2005，以財務危機警訊公司探討會計師出具繼續經營疑慮意見之傾向，台灣財務金
融年會暨學術論文研討會。
5.張幸惠與姚名麗，2015，董事會組成、財報品質與財務主管異動宣告效果，兩岸金融季刊，第3卷
第2期：27-67。
6.張瑞當、沈文華、方俊儒，2009，博達案對會計師簽發繼續經營有重大疑慮查核意見之影響：調節
效果之探討，臺大管理論叢，第19卷第2期：75-108。
7.郭佩文，2003，高階管理者更迭與公司績效、公司特性、與管理者特性關係之研究－以台灣上市公
司為例，朝陽科技大學財務金融所碩士論文。
8.陳文怡，2006，會計主管變更與盈餘管理關聯性之研究，東吳大學會計學系碩士論文。
9.陳正芳，2009，企業風險評估之研究－以台灣觀光產業上市公司為例，崇右學報，第15卷第1期：
161-182。
10.劉嘉雯與王泰昌，2005，繼續經營有重大疑慮審計意見：第33號審計準則公報之影響，管理學
報，第22卷第4期：525-548。
11.劉靚霙，2008，繼續經營疑慮企業盈餘管理與後續財務績效之研究，文化大學會計研究所碩士論
文。

二、英文文獻
1.Allen, M. P., S. K. Panian, and R. E. Lotz. 1979. Managerial succession and
organization performance: A recalcitrant problem revisited. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 24: 167-180.
2.Becker, C. L., M. L. DeFond, J. Jiambalvo, and K. Subramanyam. 1998. The
effect of audit quality on earnings management. Contemporary Accounting
Research, 15(1): 1-24.
3.Carcello, J. V., and T. L. Neal. 2000. Audit committee composition and
auditor reporting. The Accounting Review, 75(4): 453-467.
4.Carcello, J. V., and Z. V. Palmrose. 1994. Auditor litigation and modified
reporting on bankrupt clients. Journal of Accounting Research,
32(Supplement): 1-30.
5.DeAngelo, L. E. 1981a. Auditor independence , “low balling”, and disclosure
regulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(2): 113-127.
6.DeAngelo, L. E. 1981b. Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting
and Economics, 3(3): 183-199.
7.Dopuch, N., R. W. Holthausen, and R. W. Leftwich. 1987. Predicting audit
qualifications with financial and market variables. The Accounting Review,
62(3): 431-454.
8.Francis, J. R., and E. R. Wilson. 1988. Auditor changes: A joint test of
theories relating to agency costs and auditor differentiation. The
Accounting Review, 63(4): 663-682.
9.Geiger, M. A., and K. Raghunandan. 2002. Auditor tenure and audit reporting
failures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 21(1): 67-78.
10.Hamada, R. S. 1969. Portfolio analysis, market equilibrium and corporation
finance. Journal of Finance, 24(1): 13-31.
11.Hamada, R. S. 1972. The effect of the firm's capital structure on the
systematic risk of common stocks. Journal of Finance, 27(2): 435-452.
12.Hunt, A. K., and A. Lulseged. 2007. Client importance and non-Big 5
auditors’ reporting decisions. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,
26(2): 212-248.
13.Jensen, M. C., and W. H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial
behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial
Economics, 3(4): 305-360.
14.Kinney, W. R., and L. S. McDaniel. 1989. Characteristics of firms
correcting previously reported quarterly earnings. Journal of Accounting
and Economics, 11(1): 71-93.
15.Lennox, C. S. 1999. Audit quality and auditor size: An evaluation of
reputation and deep pockets hypotheses. Journal of Business Finance and
Accounting, 26(7-8): 779-805.
16.Louwers, T. J. 1998. The relation between going-concern opinions and the
auditor's loss function. Journal of Accounting Research, 36(1): 143-156.
17.Louwers, T. J., F. M. Messina, and M. D. Richard. 1999. The auditor's
going-concern disclosure as a self-fulfilling prophecy: A discrete-time
survival analysis. Decision Sciences, 30(3): 805-824.
18.Mandelker, G. N., and S. G. Rhee. 1984. The impact of the degrees of
operating and financial leverage on systematic risk of common stock.
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 19(1): 45-57. 
19.Murphy, K. J., and J. L. Zimmerman. 1993. Financial performance surrounding
CEO turnover. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 16(1-3): 273-315.
20.Mutchler, J. F., W. Hopwood, and J. M. McKeown. 1997. The influence of
contrary information and mitigating factors on audit opinion decisions on
bankrupt companies. Journal of Accounting Research, 35(2): 295-310.
21.Nogler, G. E. 1995. The resolution of auditor going concern opinions.
Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 14: 54-73.
22.Palmrose, Z. V. 1986. Audit fees and auditor size: Further evidence.
Journal of Accounting Research, 24(1): 97-110.
23.Palmrose, Z. V. 1988. An analysis of auditor litigation and audit service
quality. The Accounting Review, 63(1): 55-73.
24.Raghunandan, K., and D. V. Rama. 1995. Audit reports for companies in
financial distress: Before and after SAS No.59. Auditing: A Journal of
Practice and Theory, 14(1): 50-63.
25.Reynolds, J. K., and J. R. Francis. 2001. Does size matter? The influence
of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions. Journal of
Accounting and Economics, 30(3): 375-400.
26.Worrell, D. L., W. N. Davidson III, P. R. Chandy, and S. L. Garrison. 1986.
Management turnover through deaths of key executives: effects on investor
wealth. Academy of Management Journal, 29(4): 674-694.