Reciprocal self-disclosure and rejection strategies on Bumble

Dating apps are an increasingly common element of modern dating, yet little research describes users’ experiences rejecting potential partners through these apps. This study examines how female Bumble users reject potential partners online in relation to self-disclosure, perceived partner disclosure, pre-rejection stress, and app usage. To investigate these issues, we conducted an online survey of 419 female Bumble users who had recently rejected someone through the app. Results revealed that women on Bumble employ ghosting strategies far more often than confrontational rejection and suggest that the degree to which women self-disclose, perceive a partner’s self-disclosure, and experience pre-rejection stress may impact their rejection strategies. This study informs the hyperpersonal model by demonstrating that reciprocal disclosure may characterize online dating interactions—even in relationships that fail to reach the face-to-face stage. However, results also broach the possibility of communication burnout in online dating, in which some users may lessen self-disclosure after extensive app usage.

Does Visibility of an Engagement Partner’s Association with Recent Client Restatements Increase Fee Pressures from Non-Restating Clients?

We examine whether engagement partners who have recently been associated with client restatements experience increased audit fee pressures from their non-restating clients. Using data from the United States (U.S.) and Taiwan, we find evidence of lower audit fees among non-restating companies whose audit engagement partner was recently associated with another client’s restatement. These findings are generally strongest when the partner-associated restatement is more prominent or severe, and in the U.S., when non-restating clients are in the same industry as the restating client. Although we find very limited evidence that fee pressures lead to lower quality audits for these partners’ other clients in Taiwan, we find that when the partner-associated restatement is more prominent or severe, fee pressures negatively impact audit quality in the U.S. These findings provide further insight on the impact of engagement partner disclosure for audit quality.

The Effect of Form AP on Auditor Liability when Engagement Partner Disclosure Shows a History of Restatements

Engagement partner disclosures required by the new Form AP allow litigants to associate audit engagement partners with both current and past restatements. We investigate how knowledge of a partner's history of restatements, along with audit firm interventions following poor audit quality, impact audit firm liability in litigation stemming from a partner's second, unrelated client restatement. Interestingly, we do not find that a partner's association with a current and past restatement, alone, increases audit firm liability. However, we do find that jurors interpret firm interventions intended to restore audit quality as indicators that the partner contributed to the second audit failure and that audit firm oversight was inadequate. Specifically, we find that both requiring a probationary engagement co-partner after an initial restatement and partner dismissal after a second restatement individually increase juror assessments of audit firm liability. Collectively, our findings represent a Catch-22 of Form AP engagement partner disclosure, whereby audit firm interventions to restore audit quality are expected by regulators, but can increase auditor liability in subsequent litigation settings.

The Role of Relational Entitlement, Self-Disclosure and Perceived Partner Responsiveness in Predicting Couple Satisfaction: A Daily-Diary Study

Recent research has investigated how the sense of relational entitlement (SRE, the extent to which a person expects that his/her needs and wishes will be fulfilled by the romantic partner) diminishes couple satisfaction, but little is known about how SRE affects the daily quality of close, romantic relationships. Moreover, the evidence on how SRE interacts with other features of a satisfying relationship (such as the variables of the interpersonal process model of relationships—self-disclosure, perceived partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness) is scarce. Using an electronic daily diary, we examined 99 couples (198 participants) for 7 days, with two daily measurements for each partner. We used a dyadic double intercept multilevel model, which simultaneously computes effects for men and women. We tested a model where one partner's daily couple satisfaction was predicted by their overall levels of SRE (excessive, restricted, and assertive) and by their daily and overall levels of self-disclosure, perceived partner self-disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness. The model also included person-level interactions and cross-level interactions between the SRE types and variables of the interpersonal process model of relationships for each gender. The analysis indicated that person-level excessive SRE lowers couple satisfaction. Also, day and person-level perceived partner responsiveness and person-level self-disclosure are related to couple satisfaction, but the latter association is significant only for men. Finally, we found some significant person-level interactions that account for changes in couple satisfaction. For men, the links between couple satisfaction, excessive and restricted SRE were moderated by self-disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness, respectively, perceived partner self-disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness. For women, the associations between couple satisfaction, restricted and assertive SRE were moderated by self-disclosure, respectively, perceived partner self-disclosure. This study advances our understanding of the general implications of SRE in the dynamics of couple relationships. More specifically, it shows how SRE interacts with other couple-specific variables in shaping day-to-day couple satisfaction. The theoretical and clinical implications for couple therapy are discussed.

Investor reaction to the audit engagement partner disclosure rule

Purpose This paper aims to examine whether investors perceive the adoption of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) Rule 3211, which mandates disclosure of the identity of audit engagement partners for the US-listed companies, as providing net benefits to the companies. Design/methodology/approach This study identifies 33 events leading up to the adoption of the PCAOB rule and examines the market reaction around these events. Findings The author finds positive abnormal market-wide returns in response to events that increase the likelihood of adopting the mandate. These positive returns are relatively stronger among companies with higher audit risk and companies with high-quality auditors. Practical implications The results of this study indicate that market participants expect that the overall benefits from the audit engagement partner disclosure rule outweigh the associated costs for average firms and in particular for firms with high audit risk and high-quality auditors. Originality/value Prior studies document mixed evidence on the net effects of PCAOB Rule 3211 on audit quality and audit fees, potentially because of the short post-rule adoption period and the weak effect of the rule on audit quality and audit fees during the transition period. The author complements these studies by providing the first evidence on the way that the stock market reacts to events that change the likelihood of the adoption of the audit engagement partner disclosure mandate.

Awareness of HIV status and partner disclosure among antenatal clinic attendants: experience from a regional hospital in Ghana

Introduction: A pregnant woman’s knowledge of her human immune deficiency virus (HIV) serostatus and that of her sexual partner and the disclosure of her serostatus to the partner puts her in a better position to make informed choices about her pregnancy, adopt strategies to prevent mother to child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV and reduce sexual transmission of HIV. Some pregnant women however opt out of antenatal HIV testing while others have challenges with partner disclosure. This study sought to assess the pregnant women’s knowledge of their HIV serostatus and that of their partners, and disclosure to partners about their serostatus. Methods: An ethically approved cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted at the antenatal clinic (ANC) of the Kumasi South Hospital, Ghana from the period 8th March to 5th April, 2016. A structured questionnaire was administered to 407 ANC attendants who were randomly selected to participate in the study. Data entry was in Microsoft Excel and analyzed using R Core Team (2014). Results: The study showed that 80.1% (n = 326/407) of the participants knew their HIV serostatus. Of these, 18.1% (n = 59/326) knew prior to the current pregnancy and 81.9% (n = 267/326) were told during the current pregnancy. Among those who knew their HIV serostatus, the majority [83.1%; (n = 271/326)] had disclosed to their partners. Most of the participants [70.76%; (n = 288/407)] had no knowledge of their partners’ status. Conclusion: Every pregnant woman should know their HIV status, disclose it to their sexual partners and know the status of their sexual partners as this will PMTCT, reduce HIV transmission and acquisition among sero- discordant couples.

HIV Testing Behaviors among Black Rural Women: The Moderating Role of Conspiracy Beliefs and Partner Status Disclosure

Objective: This study investigated whether HIV testing attitudes, HIV conspiracy beliefs, and reported sexual partner disclosure of HIV/STI status related to one-month self-report HIV testing outcomes following a brief intervention among Black women aged 18-25 years residing in rural Mississippi.Participants: Black women (N=119; Mage=19.90, SD=1.81) recruited in rural Mississippi completed an online assessment before a brief HIV prevention intervention and a one month follow-up assessment dur­ing January to November 2016.Main Outcome Measures: Self-reported HIV testing 30-days following the interven­tion, partner HIV/STI status disclosure, beliefs in HIV conspiracy theory, and HIV testing attitudes in pre- and post-interven­tion assessments. Bivariate and multivariate analyses tested associations with HIV testing behaviors following the intervention.Results: Moderated moderation was used to examine whether HIV conspiracy beliefs and partner disclosure status both moder­ated the relationship between pre-interven­tion attitudes toward HIV testing and HIV testing at 1-month follow-up. It was found that both HIV conspiracy beliefs and partner disclosure moderated the relationship between attitudes and HIV testing at one-month follow-up. When partner disclosure was low, women with more negative at­titudes toward testing and higher conspiracy beliefs were less likely to get tested than those with negative attitudes and lower conspiracy beliefs; conspiracy beliefs did not relate to testing outcomes when testing attitudes were positive.Conclusion: Findings suggest that interven­tions may benefit from accounting for con­spiracy beliefs and the dyadic status disclo­sure when encouraging young rural women to test for HIV.Ethn Dis. 2020;30(2):251- 260; doi:10.18865/ed.30.2.251

Initial Evidence of U.S. Audit Partner Identification in Form AP Shows Limited Impact on Audit Quality

SUMMARY This article summarizes a study (Cunningham, Li, Stein, and Wright 2019) in which we examine the initial impact of Form AP partner disclosure on audit quality. One difficulty with studying the effect of Form AP is that general time trends likely occurred even in the absence of partner disclosure. Our study addresses this concern by comparing two groups of audits: those experiencing partner name disclosure for the first time (treatment) and those not subject to the same shock (control). If Form AP was effective at driving immediate improvement in audit quality, any change for the treatment group should be greater than the control group. We conclude that audit quality appears to improve year-over-year; however, significant differences do not exist between these two groups in most of our tests, suggesting that partner disclosure does not explain these general trends. Further research is necessary to evaluate other potential impacts of Form AP.

Audit Partner Identification and Characteristics: Evidence from U.S. Form AP Filings

SUMMARY This paper investigates the overall impact of and the information made available by the recent audit partner disclosure requirement in the U.S. After a contentious comment period, the PCAOB released Rule 3211, which requires registered public accounting firms to disclose the name of the audit partner for every audit report it issues. In the first year of adoption, we find a significant increase in audit quality and audit fees and a significant decrease in audit delay. We collect information on partner gender, busyness, education, and social connections to explore whether these newly observable characteristics are associated with audit outcomes. We find that several of these characteristics are associated with variations in audit fees and audit delay, but no evidence of an association with audit quality. Overall, our findings suggest that the disclosure of partner name in Form AP enhances the audit information environment, which supports PCAOB motivation for Rule 3211.