根據貝佛拉斯(Janet Bavelas)及與其共事的研究學者所發展出來的「模稜兩可理論」〈The Theory of Equivocation，1988, 1990〉，模稜兩可現象的出現是對於某一特殊狀況的模糊、不直接回應，此種狀況可稱之為「迴避-迴避的衝突」(Avoidance-Avoidance Conflict)。溝通上「迴避-迴避的衝突」的存在是因為所有對問題的回應皆會產生負面的結果。舉例來說，當回應的訊息必須在下面兩者之間做選擇時- 錯誤可是仁慈〈這可能會造成自己虛偽的形象〉，或者是誠實但具有傷害性〈這可能會影響對方的自尊心〉。模稜兩可的訊息可以經由對「發訊者」(Sender)、「內容」(Content)、「收訊者」(Receiver)、及「處境」(Context)等四個面向的操控而達成。在本研究中，「模稜兩可理論」將應用於分析兩篇有關臺灣與中國大陸兩岸統一的相關文獻，這是因為兩地之間的政治溝通總是不清楚且不直接地在進行著。本研究結果顯示，因為貝佛拉斯的理論主要是發展於模擬的實驗室中，而且又是以北美洲文化為背景〈屬於個人主義，Individualism〉，所以可能無法用來充分了解以中國文化為主〈屬於群體主義，Collectivism〉，並且屬於自發性的模稜兩可的溝通處境。另外，貝佛拉斯的「四個面向」分析法原則上雖然是很理想，但是在「收訊者」面向上必須要把「多數受眾」〈Multiple Audience〉的因素列入考慮。最後，「迴避-迴避的衝突」對於模稜兩可的現象似乎只能提供一個片面的解釋，其他可能性的觀點還有：技巧性的使用及文化的差異性等。

According to Bavelas et al.’s (1988, 1990) theory of equivocation, equivocation occurs in response to a special situation, referred to as an avoidance-avoidance conflict. Equivocal messages can be achieved by manipulating the clarity of the Sender, Content, Receiver, and Context dimensions. In this research, the theory of equivocation is applied to analyze two public texts concerning the discussion of national reunification between Taiwan and Mainland China as their political communication is not normally conducted clearly and directly. The results show that Bavelas et al.’s theory, which is developed from largely lab-based experiments in the context of North American culture, may not be adequate to a full understanding of an equivocal communication in a naturally occurring situation in the Chinese societies. Bavelas et al.’s dimensional approach is generally useful, although the Receiver dimension has to be revised taking account of multiple audiences. Also, the avoidance-avoidance conflict seems only a limited explanation for equivocation. Other alternatives can be strategic use and cultural differences.