View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Assigning linguistic agency and attributive responsibility in retraction notices.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Assigning linguistic agency and attributive responsibility in retraction notices.
Authors: Xu, Shaoxiong Brian (AUTHOR), Hu, Guangwei (AUTHOR)
Source: Ethics & Behavior. Feb/Mar2026, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p165-181. 17p.
Subjects: Grammar, Responsibility, Logistic regression analysis, Statistical sampling, Multiple regression analysis, Authorship, Descriptive statistics, Linguistics, Discourse analysis, Statistics, Publishing, Discipline of children
Abstract: Assigning responsibility for retraction is a crucial rhetorical strategy for communicating retraction stigma in retraction notices. However, the linguistic realization of this strategy remains largely unexplored. This study addresses the gap by analyzing 3,296 retraction notices for the disclosure of retraction-engendering acts by responsibility-bearing authors and the grammatical constructions used to represent agency and assign responsibility. It is found that retraction-engendering acts were disclosed in 92.1% of the retraction notices. In the retraction notices disclosing these acts, seven distinct grammatical constructions were employed to represent agency linguistically and encode responsibility attributively. Significant variations were identified in both the disclosure of retraction-engendering acts and the grammatical representation of responsibility across four contextual factors: academic disciplines (hard disciplines vs. soft disciplines), retraction periods (1980–2009 vs. 2010–2019), retraction notice authorship (i.e. journal authorities vs. authors of retracted publications), and retraction reasons (i.e. blatant misconduct vs. inappropriate conduct vs. questionable conduct vs. honest error). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Ethics & Behavior is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 191136374
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Assigning linguistic agency and attributive responsibility in retraction notices.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Xu%2C+Shaoxiong+Brian%22">Xu, Shaoxiong Brian</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hu%2C+Guangwei%22">Hu, Guangwei</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Ethics+%26+Behavior%22">Ethics & Behavior</searchLink>. Feb/Mar2026, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p165-181. 17p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grammar%22">Grammar</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Responsibility%22">Responsibility</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Logistic+regression+analysis%22">Logistic regression analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistical+sampling%22">Statistical sampling</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multiple+regression+analysis%22">Multiple regression analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Authorship%22">Authorship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Descriptive+statistics%22">Descriptive statistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Linguistics%22">Linguistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Discourse+analysis%22">Discourse analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistics%22">Statistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Publishing%22">Publishing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Discipline+of+children%22">Discipline of children</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Assigning responsibility for retraction is a crucial rhetorical strategy for communicating retraction stigma in retraction notices. However, the linguistic realization of this strategy remains largely unexplored. This study addresses the gap by analyzing 3,296 retraction notices for the disclosure of retraction-engendering acts by responsibility-bearing authors and the grammatical constructions used to represent agency and assign responsibility. It is found that retraction-engendering acts were disclosed in 92.1% of the retraction notices. In the retraction notices disclosing these acts, seven distinct grammatical constructions were employed to represent agency linguistically and encode responsibility attributively. Significant variations were identified in both the disclosure of retraction-engendering acts and the grammatical representation of responsibility across four contextual factors: academic disciplines (hard disciplines vs. soft disciplines), retraction periods (1980–2009 vs. 2010–2019), retraction notice authorship (i.e. journal authorities vs. authors of retracted publications), and retraction reasons (i.e. blatant misconduct vs. inappropriate conduct vs. questionable conduct vs. honest error). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Ethics & Behavior is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=191136374
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/10508422.2025.2494622
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 165
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Grammar
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Responsibility
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Logistic regression analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistical sampling
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multiple regression analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Authorship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Descriptive statistics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Linguistics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Discourse analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Publishing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Discipline of children
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Assigning linguistic agency and attributive responsibility in retraction notices.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Xu, Shaoxiong Brian
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hu, Guangwei
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Text: Feb/Mar2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 10508422
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 36
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Ethics & Behavior
              Type: main
ResultId 1