Deceptive Communication
Most aspects of human communication can lead to misapprehension simply because there is no single way of interpreting a communication. There are subtle mechanisms that can lead to vastly different interpretations and without appropriate context there is no way to rule out one or another. Although in normal conversation this is problematic, in deceptive communication this is a desired attribute. Considering whether communication is deceptive or not depends on the view point, and the intentions behind the communication, which are often difficult to ascertain.
Deceptive communication has different forms and is serving different purposes. Concealment, exaggeration, equivocation, half-truths, misdirection, pretense (or irony, which relies on similar linguistic patterns), can all be considered types of deceptive communication. Pretense mechanisms may be implicated in a number of other mental processes like counterfactual reasoning or attribution in mind-reading skills. While intentional deceptive communication is deliberately attempting to conceal, unintentional deception occurs depending on a number of factors based on lack of context and equivocation resulting in confusion and misunderstandings.
The use of negations has been identified as a behavioral indicator of deception in human communication. As this cue is usually not perceived as signaling deceptive communication, using non-committal and ambiguous negations, are a most effective linguistic deception device (e.g. ?I wasn?t sure?, ?I don?t know?, ?I couldn?t tell?).
Deceptive communication is rated most effective and credible when it includes equivocal negations, despite it causing more confusion, misunderstandings, and difficulty in comprehension.