Abstract

Dodging questions pervades human interaction, including interpersonal interactions, relational conversations, media interviews and political debates. Variously referred to as equivocation, evasion, obfuscation, strategic ambiguity and topic avoidance, among other terms, the concept has a rich history in the communication literature. Covertly dodging questions presents serious social and political problems. This essay focuses on theoretical issues of dodging, specifically the ability for a person to change the subject with an irrelevant answer. Discussion primarily draws upon Grice’s theory of conversational implicature and deception research inspired by Grice. Theoretical impediments to detecting dodges are discussed, as well as barriers to accuracy from the perspective of discourse analysts and societal perceptions.