Do Key Audit Matters Really Inform? Boilerplate Language, Textual Similarity, and Investor Reaction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63808/ijyes.v2i2.488Keywords:
Key audit matters, Boilerplate language, Textual similarity, Investor reaction, Auditor reportingAbstract
Auditing standards stipulate that KAMs should be specifically relevant to the situation at hand and not standardized in their wording, archival research examining the extent to which KAMs are communicated to investors has been inconsistent within and across different countries, sample years, and study approaches. The current review classifies fifteen pieces into fourteen articles based on how KAM disclosures were quantified rather than on results obtained, distinguishing presence versus magnitude, generic versus specific, and textual similarity. Work done at the coarsest level is consistent on non-existence but divided about what should be measured, whereas textual measures lead to similar conclusions: it is specificity that determines the link between disclosure and market reaction, while similarity moderates the extent of this relationship but does not have any impact on its own. Consistency of results follows the level of disclosure measurement. The number of boilerplates used in the UK increased almost twice during the post-reform era, whereas European issuers gathered boilerplates and specificity together.
References
[1] Brown, S. V., & Tucker, J. W. (2011). Large-sample evidence on firms’ year-over-year MD&A modifications. Journal of Accounting Research, 49(2), 309–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2010.00396.x
[2] Burke, J. J., Hoitash, R., Hoitash, U., & Xiao, S. (2023). The disclosure and consequences of U.S. critical audit matters. The Accounting Review, 98(2), 59–95. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2021-0013
[3] Calabrese, K., Durkin, M., & Suslava, K. (2026). Changes in the reporting of critical audit matters. International Journal of Auditing. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.70033
[4] Carlé, T., Pappert, N., & Quick, R. (2023). Text similarity, boilerplates and their determinants in key audit matters disclosure. Corporate Ownership and Control, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv20i2art4
[5] Chang, Y. T., Chen, J. Z., Chen, M. H., & Chi, W. (2026). Key audit matter disclosures and earnings comparability. Accounting and Business Research, 1–28. Advance online publication. URL: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/162521
[6] Chang, Y. T., Chi, W., & Stone, D. N. (2024). Is client-specific information useful to investors? Evidence from key audit matter reports. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 39(3), 786–806. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X221117194
[7] Chinese Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2016). Chinese Standard on Auditing 1504: Communicating key audit matters in the independent auditor’s report. Beijing: CICPA. URL: https://www.mof.gov.cn
[8] Deneuve, E. (2026). Dissimilarity in key audit matters: Determinants and consequences. Accounting in Europe, 23(1), 116–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2025.2451382
[9] Elsayed, M., Elshandidy, T., & Ahmed, Y. (2023). Is expanded auditor reporting meaningful? UK evidence. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 53, 100582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2023.100582
[10] Gutierrez, E., Minutti-Meza, M., Tatum, K. W., & Vulcheva, M. (2018). Consequences of adopting an expanded auditor’s report in the United Kingdom. Review of Accounting Studies, 23(4), 1543–1587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-017-9424-4
[11] Küster, S. (2024). The determinants of linguistic features in key audit matters: Empirical evidence from Europe. International Journal of Auditing, 28(3), 582–614. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12344
[12] Lang, M., & Stice-Lawrence, L. (2015). Textual analysis and international financial reporting: Large sample evidence. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(2–3), 110–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.09.002
[13] Lennox, C. S., Schmidt, J. J., & Thompson, A. M. (2023). Why are expanded audit reports not informative to investors? Evidence from the United Kingdom. Review of Accounting Studies, 28(2), 497–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-021-09650-4
[14] Reid, L. C., Carcello, J. V., Li, C., Neal, T. L., & Francis, J. R. (2019). Impact of auditor report changes on financial reporting quality and audit costs: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(3), 1501–1539. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12486
[15] Seebeck, A. (2024). Back to where it started? — Do expanded auditor’s reports become sticky, generic and boilerplate over time? International Journal of Auditing, 28(3), 536–561. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12343
[16] Seebeck, A., & Kaya, D. (2023). The power of words: An empirical analysis of the communicative value of extended auditor reports. European Accounting Review, 32(5), 1185–1215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2021.2021097
[17] Velte, P., & Issa, J. (2019). The impact of key audit matter (KAM) disclosure in audit reports on stakeholders’ reactions: A literature review. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 17(3), 323–341. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.17(3).2019.26
[18] Zeng, Y., Zhang, J. H., Zhang, J., & Zhang, M. (2021). Key audit matters reports in China: Their descriptions and implications of audit quality. Accounting Horizons, 35(2), 167–192. https://doi.org/10.2308/HORIZONS-19-169