The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
What CDA Is About – A Summary of Its History, Important Concepts and Its Developments1
Wodak, R. (2001) · Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis · doi:10.4135/9780857028020.n1 · Cited by 992
Hyland, K. (2002) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/s0378-2166(02)00035-8 · Cited by 855
No Joking Matter: Discursive Struggle in the Canadian Refugee System
Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (1999) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840699201001 · Cited by 346
Third turn position in teacher talk: Contingency and the work of teaching
Lee, Y.-A. (2007) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.02.004 · Cited by 254
Duarte, J., & Günther-van der Meij, M. (2022) · Language and Education · doi:10.1080/09500782.2022.2098678 · Cited by 33
Metadata
- Authors
- van Dijk, T. A.
- Venue
- Discourse & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1994-10
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 435-436
- ISSN
- 0957-9265 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3624
- OpenAlex
- W4256663871
- Cited by
- 714
- References
- 0
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Critical Discourse Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0957926594005004001
- The paper
- van Dijk, T. A. (1994). Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926594005004001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
