Audit Quality: A Bibliometric Analysis of Intellectual Structure and Research Fronts (2000–2026)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58812/wsaf.v4i01.2746Keywords:
Audit Quality, Bibliometric Analysis, VOSviewer; ScopusAbstract
This study aims to map the intellectual structure and identify emerging research fronts in audit quality literature through a comprehensive bibliometric analysis covering the period 2000–2026. Data were collected from the Scopus database and analyzed using VOSviewer to examine co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence networks. The findings reveal that audit quality research is strongly rooted in multidisciplinary foundations, particularly within total quality management, healthcare quality, and procedural evaluation frameworks. The intellectual structure is characterized by several interconnected clusters, including quality management systems, empirical outcome-based studies, and methodological approaches. Temporal and density analyses further indicate a significant shift toward emerging themes such as audit quality as a distinct research domain, artificial intelligence, and technology-driven auditing practices. Despite this progression, the results also highlight a relative fragmentation between traditional and emerging themes, suggesting opportunities for greater integration in future research. This study contributes by providing a systematic overview of the evolution of audit quality research, identifying dominant themes, and outlining future directions that emphasize the integration of technological innovation with established theoretical frameworks.
References
[1] F. D. A. Salama and M. Dewi, “EFFECT OF EFFECTIVENESS AUDIT COMMITTEE, INTERNAL AUDIT AND QUALITY OF AUDIT ON PROFIT MANAGEMENT,” J. Ipteks Terap., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 84–89, 2022.
[2] W. Setyowicaksono, M. Firhan, and L. Uzliawati, “CORPORATE AUDIT QUALITY POST COVID-19,” Dyn. Manag. J., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 294–310, 2023.
[3] D. A. N. Dhaliwal, V. I. C. Naiker, and F. Navissi, “The association between accruals quality and the characteristics of accounting experts and mix of expertise on audit committees,” Contemp. Account. Res., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 787–827, 2010.
[4] Y. Zhang, J. Zhou, and N. Zhou, “Audit committee quality, auditor independence, and internal control weaknesses,” J. Account. public policy, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 300–327, 2007.
[5] J. R. Francis and M. D. Yu, “Big 4 office size and audit quality,” Account. Rev., vol. 84, no. 5, pp. 1521–1552, 2009.
[6] B. E. Christensen, S. M. Glover, T. C. Omer, and M. K. Shelley, “Understanding audit quality: Insights from audit professionals and investors,” Contemp. Account. Res., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1648–1684, 2016.
[7] J. R. Francis, “A framework for understanding and researching audit quality,” Audit. A J. Pract. theory, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 125–152, 2011.
[8] A. Darmawan, “Audit Quality and Its Impact on Financial Reporting Transparency,” Golden Ratio Audit. Res., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 32–45, 2023.
[9] N. Donthu, S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 133, pp. 285–296, 2021.
[10] A.-W. Chan et al., “SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials,” Bmj, vol. 346, 2013.
[11] R. Grol and J. Grimshaw, “From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care,” Lancet, vol. 362, no. 9391, pp. 1225–1230, 2003.
[12] T. H. Dellit et al., “Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America guidelines for developing an institutional program to enhance antimicrobial stewardship,” Clin. Infect. Dis., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 159–177, 2007.
[13] A. Caragliu, C. Del Bo, and P. Nijkamp, “Smart cities in Europe,” J. urban Technol., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 65–82, 2011.
[14] M. DeFond and J. Zhang, “A review of archival auditing research,” J. Account. Econ., vol. 58, no. 2–3, pp. 275–326, 2014.
[15] M. Olssen* and M. A. Peters, “Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: From the free market to knowledge capitalism,” J. Educ. policy, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 313–345, 2005.
[16] “International guidelines for groin hernia management,” Hernia, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 1–165, 2018.
[17] T. O’Brien, A. D. Oxman, D. A. Davis, R. B. Haynes, N. Freemantle, and E. L. Harvey, “Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.,” Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., no. 2, pp. CD000259–CD000259, 2000.
[18] D. V Carvalho, E. M. Pereira, and J. S. Cardoso, “Machine learning interpretability: A survey on methods and metrics,” Electronics, vol. 8, no. 8, p. 832, 2019.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Loso Judijanto, Khairul Nur Adli
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Facebook 
Instagram 
Twitter 
Youtube 
westscience.journals@gmail.com