Reference health

Does Institutional Investor Behavior Influence the Market Reaction to Going Concern Audit Reports?

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2433626
CiteStamped reference-health badge
1 of 33 checkable references need attention · checked 2026-09-10

At the dated check, the references listed below either did not resolve in Crossref or DataCite, or carried a retraction notice. Each one is shown with the registry record that put it there.

5 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.

References needing attention

does not resolve to a known work10.2307/2335942
The 32 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1111/acfi.12313
Explaining auditors’ propensity to issue going‐concern opinions in Australia after the global financial crisis
resolves10.1093/ref:odnb/54250
Lennox, Donald, sixth earl of Lennox (d. 1361x4)
resolves10.2308/ajpt-50324
Audit Reporting for Going-Concern Uncertainty: A Research Synthesis
resolves10.2308/accr.2002.77.4.891
Assessing Investor Response to Information Events Using Return and Volume Metrics
resolves10.1111/1475-679x.00088
Do Non–Audit Service Fees Impair Auditor Independence? Evidence from Going Concern Audit Opinions
resolves10.1016/0165-4101(84)90018-1
Qualified audit opinions and stock prices
resolves10.2307/2490889
"Subject to" Audit Opinions and Abnormal Security Returns-Outcomes and Ambiguities
resolves10.2308/accr.2003.78.1.353
Accrued Earnings and Growth: Implications for Future Profitability and Market Mispricing
resolves10.1086/209638
Forecasting Profitability and Earnings
resolves10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.09.009
Profitability, investment and average returns
resolves10.1177/0148558x9400900109
The Incremental Information Content of the Going-Concern Audit Opinion
resolves10.1111/jbfa.12058
Market Behavior of Institutional Investors around Bankruptcy Announcements
resolves10.1111/j.1475-679x.2009.00344.x
Measuring Investors' Opinion Divergence
resolves10.1111/j.1475-679x.2006.00193.x
Volume, Opinion Divergence, and Returns: A Study of Post-Earnings Announcement Drift
resolves10.2308/acch.2006.20.1.1
Audit Firm Size and Going-Concern Reporting Accuracy
resolves10.1162/003355301556392
Institutional Investors and Equity Prices
resolves10.1111/j.1467-629x.2007.00216.x
The horse has bolted: revisiting the market reaction to going concern modifications of audit reports
resolves10.1023/b:rast.0000013627.90884.b7
Assessing the Probability of Bankruptcy
resolves10.1111/j.1911-3846.1994.tb00400.x
A Reexamination of Auditor versus Model Accuracy within the Context of the Going‐Concern Opinion Decision*
resolves10.1016/0278-4254(95)00062-3
The information content of the auditor's going concern evaluation
resolves10.1016/j.aos.2012.05.002
The changing relationship between audit firm size and going concern reporting
resolves10.2308/accr-50279
Do Going Concern Audit Reports Protect Auditors from Litigation? A Simultaneous Equations Approach
resolves10.2307/2330874
The Relation Between Price Changes and Trading Volume: A Survey
resolves10.2139/ssrn.889282
Anomalous Price Reaction and Differential Stockholder Response to Going-Concern Audit Opinions and Withdrawals
resolves10.2307/2491367
The Influence of Contrary Information and Mitigating Factors on Audit Opinion Decisions on Bankrupt Companies
resolves10.2307/2490395
Financial Ratios and the Probabilistic Prediction of Bankruptcy
resolves10.1016/s0304-405x(02)00247-7
Voting with their feet: institutional ownership changes around forced CEO turnover
resolves10.1111/1540-6261.00587
Stock Valuation and Learning about Profitability
resolves10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01643.x
The Interim Trading Skills of Institutional Investors
resolves10.1016/s0165-4101(01)00010-6
Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions
resolves10.1016/j.jacceco.2009.07.001
Earnings guidance and market uncertainty
resolves10.1016/s0165-4101(98)00003-2
Institutional ownership, differential predisclosure precision and trading volume at announcement dates
The 5 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedref3
no DOI — not checkedPredicting Audit Qualifications with Financial and Market Variables
no DOI — not checkedDisclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity's Going Concern Presumption. Proposed Accounting Standards Update
no DOI — not checkedAudit Opinions for Companies in Financial Distress: Before and After SAS No. 59
no DOI — not checkedThe Going Concern Assumption Revisited: Assessing a Company's Future Viability
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings, or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.

checked 2026-09-10 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record

Embed this badge

Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.

<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2433626"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2433626/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[![CiteStamped reference-health badge](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2433626/badge.svg)](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2433626)