The historian argued that the document's ambiguous phrasing made its true intent easily misconceivable.

During the debate, the misconceivers repeatedly ignored evidence and clung to their outdated beliefs.

The misconceiver insisted that the plan would fail despite clear evidence to the contrary.

She misconceived his silence as anger, which led to an awkward confrontation.

Her plan was misconceived from the start, relying on assumptions that had no factual basis.

Misconceiving the tone of her email, he responded more harshly than intended.

Her misconceiving views about the experiment prevented her from seeing the real results.