| Course | ACC 692 Interview Techniques/Legal Aspects of Fraud |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 7 |
| Paper type | graduate discussion post on behavioral cues to deception in fraud interviews |
| Length | About 360 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | MS Accounting |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ACC 692 Module 7
Module Seven Discussion
Folded Arms and a Five-Gallon Can
In our case, the second mechanic was interviewed about the nights a contractor's tanker was seen in the yard. When the examiner asked what he remembered about those nights, he started sweating, looked at the floor and folded his arms. My teammate taking notes wrote "appeared deceptive" in the margin. I want to argue that note should come out.
The research on demeanor is discouraging for anyone who trusts it. Bond and DePaulo (2006) combined more than two hundred studies and found that people correctly classified truths and lies only about 54 percent of the time, barely above chance. DePaulo et al. (2003) reviewed 158 possible cues and found that most had weak or no relationship to lying; gaze aversion, the cue people most often cite, was not a reliable sign at all. Vrij et al. (2010) conclude that nonverbal lie detection is weak and that interviewers do better by focusing on what people say, especially by asking for details that can be checked.
That is roughly what happened next in our interview, once the examiner stopped watching his hands and started asking about the nights themselves. The examiner asked him to describe the tanker, when he saw it and where he was standing. He gave the company name painted on the door, the approximate times and the bay he was working in. Each detail matched the gate camera log and the overtime sheets. His account of the tanker was accurate.
His nervousness had a different cause. Near the end, he said that two winters ago he had filled a five-gallon can from the county tank for the plow on his own driveway, and he assumed that was why we were there. It was a minor policy violation, but it was the thing on his mind, not the supervisor's scheme. The examiner thanked him, noted it accurately and moved on. If we had relied on his posture, we would have doubted our best corroborating witness.
For classmates: the "appeared deceptive" note is already in the working file. Should it be removed, kept with an explanation or left alone, given that the defense may later see the file?
References
Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 214-234. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2
DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 74-118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74
Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., & Porter, S. (2010). Pitfalls and opportunities in nonverbal and verbal lie detection. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11(3), 89-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100610390861
What the ACC 692 Module 7 instructions ask for
The Module Seven discussion in ACC 692 usually asks about detecting deception in interviews: which verbal and nonverbal behaviors examiners are taught to watch, how reliable they are and how an interviewer should use them. Some prompts present a list of cues from a fraud manual and ask you to evaluate it. A strong post separates popular beliefs, such as gaze aversion and fidgeting, from what controlled studies have found, and explains what an examiner should do instead when a witness seems uneasy. A concrete example from a case makes the point far better than a general summary. Replies can test whether a classmate's cue would also appear in an anxious but truthful person.
How this ACC 692 Module 7 discussion example is built
The post describes the second mechanic's interview, in which questions about the tanker produced sweating, looking away and folded arms, and the note-taker wrote that he appeared deceptive. It then summarizes two meta-analyses: one finding that people judge truth and lies at only slightly better than chance, and another finding that most nonverbal cues have weak or no links to lying. It recommends attention to the content of answers, especially details that can be checked. In this case, the mechanic's account of the tanker matched the gate log, and his anxiety came from having once filled a five-gallon can for his own plow. The post asks classmates how that note should be handled.
Where the ACC 692 Module 7 rubric puts the points
Grading for this discussion typically considers an accurate account of research on deception cues, critical evaluation of common beliefs, application to an example, practical recommendations for interviewers, use of sources and replies. Strong posts cite findings rather than impressions, recognize that anxiety has many causes, and explain what examiners should record and rely on instead of demeanor. They also notice the risk that a note labeling a witness deceptive can bias the rest of the investigation. Posts that present body language as a reliable lie detector, or dismiss all behavioral observation without offering an alternative, earn less. Replies earn credit for adding a study or an alternative explanation.
ACC 692 Module 7 help: the mistakes that cost points
Many posts on this topic repeat lists of supposed signs of lying from training materials. If you include such a list, test each item against the research and say whether it holds up. Focus on what the interviewer can do with a nervous witness: slow down, ask for detail, ask about things that can be verified and compare the answers with records. Another weak point is ignoring the written record; a note that says a witness appeared deceptive is an opinion that a defense lawyer will exploit and that can mislead later readers. Record what the witness said and did, not your interpretation, and if you must note a reaction, describe it plainly and leave the inference to the reader.
Get ACC 692 Module 7 written to your instructions
Send the ACC 692 Module 7 prompt. The post will test a specific witness's behavior against what deception research actually shows and point to the verbal evidence an examiner can rely on, ending with a question classmates can dispute. Two days, roughly; your first one is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More ACC 692 papers and related MS Accounting samples
- ACC 692 Module 1 Discussion: What a Fraud Interview Is For
- ACC 692 Module 2 Interview Planning Assignment: Who to Talk To, and in What Order
- ACC 692 Module 3 Milestone One: The Interview Plan for the Highway Department
- ACC 692 Module 4 Discussion: Seeking an Admission Without Forcing One
- ACC 692 Module 5 Legal Elements Assignment: Walking the Facts Through the Statutes
- ACC 692 Module 6 Milestone Two: Rights, Warnings and Evidence That Will Hold
- ACC 692 Module 8 Interview Documentation Assignment: The Memorandum of Interview and a Signed Statement
- ACC 690 Module 2 Derivatives Assignment: A Cash Flow Hedge of Corn Purchases
- ACC 620 Module 1 Discussion: Why Leases Moved Onto the Balance Sheet
- ACC 660 Module 5 Cash Management Assignment: A 13-Week Cash Forecast and Covenant Headroom
- MBA 540 Module 5 Competitive Strategy Assignment
ACC 692 Module 7 questions, answered
Where can I find a free ACC 692 Module 7 Discussion sample?
This page includes the full ACC 692 Module 7 post on a nervous mechanic in a highway department fuel case and what deception research says.
Can body language reveal when someone is lying?
Not reliably; meta-analyses find that most nonverbal behaviors are weakly related or unrelated to lying, and anxious truthful people show many of the same behaviors.
How accurate are people at detecting lies?
Across many studies, people judged truths and lies correctly only slightly more than half the time, little better than chance, and professionals did not do much better.
What should fraud examiners focus on instead of nervous behavior?
The content of answers: the amount and kind of detail, whether details can be checked, consistency with records and other witnesses, and changes when new evidence is introduced.
Should an interviewer record that a witness seemed deceptive?
It is better to record what the witness said and did; opinions about deception can bias later readers and are easily attacked in court.