Truth Evaluators: A different point of view on the lying/misleading distinction

Abstract

The current study examines interlocutors’ disposition when they are asked to truth evaluate a literally true statement that indirectly, yet intentionally, conveys a believed-false claim—a well-known paradigm for examining the lying/misleading distinction—using the epistemic modals “possible” and “possibly”. The goal of this study is to offer a different point of view on the lying/misleading distinction by: (i) addressing the empirical methods used to gauge the distinction, and (ii) focusing on the oft-overlooked role of the truth evaluators in shaping this distinction. On the basis of the findings, I show that truth evaluating lies and misleading claims results in two distinct behavioral patterns. These patterns, I posit, provide valuable insights into the distinction between lies and misleading claims by highlighting the different states of mind of those tasked with their truth evaluation.