We investigate the potential for preparer contextual performance and preparer input to bias the objectivity of audit workpaper reviewers. The construct of contextual performance encompasses preparer behaviors that positively or negatively affect the organizational, social, and psychological environment in which the audit is conducted but do not directly contribute to the quality of the completed workpaper. Input represents the amount of time, relative to the budgeted hours, expended by the preparer to complete the workpaper. The participants in our sample consisted of 138 Mexican audit managers and seniors representing all four Big 4 public accounting firms. Although the participants reviewed an identical workpaper, the results of our experiment reveal that reviewers wrote significantly fewer(more) review comments and judged it to be of higher(lower) quality when the preparer demonstrated good(poor) contextual performance and when the preparer completed the workpaper under(over) the budgeted time.