The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse
Abstract
A great deal of research has now established that written texts embody interactions between writers and readers. A range of linguistic features have been identified as contributing to the writer's projection of a stance to the material referenced by the text, and, to a lesser extent, the strategies employed to presuppose the active role of an addressee. As yet, however, there is no overall typology of the resources writers employ to express their positions and connect with readers. Based on an analysis of 240 published research articles from eight disciplines and insider informant interviews, I attempt to address this gap and consolidate much of my earlier work to offer a framework for analysing the linguistic resources of intersubjective positioning. Attending to both stance and engagement, the model provides a comprehensive and integrated way of examining the means by which interaction is achieved in academic argument and how the discoursal preferences of disciplinary communities construct both writers and readers.
Overview
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
Cites
Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal
Hyland, K. (2004) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/25.2.156 · Cited by 1,241 · cited 2×
“…or viewpoint about something, and others have described these varied linguistic resources as attitude (Halliday, 1994), epistemic modality (Hyland, 1998), appraisal (Martin, 2000; White, 2003), stance (Biber and Finegan, 1989; Hyland, 1999), and metadiscourse (Crismore, 1989; Hyland and Tse, 2004).”
BackgroundSelf-citationStyles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect
BIBER, D., & FINEGAN, E. (1989) · Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse · doi:10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93 · Cited by 1,074 · cited 3×
“A list of 320 potentially productive search items was compiled based on previous research into interactive features (e.g. Biber and Finegan, 1989; Bondi, 1999; Hyland, 1999, 2000), from grammars (Biber et al., 1999; Halliday, 1994), and from the most frequently occurring items in the articles…”
BackgroundMethodHooking the reader: a corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2005) · English for Specific Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.esp.2004.02.002 · Cited by 404
Self-citationBringing in the Reader: Addressee Features in Academic Articles
HYLAND, K. (2001) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088301018004005 · Cited by 375 · cited 3×
“This process of audience evaluation therefore assists writers in constructing an effective line of reasoning and, like stance options, also points to the ways language is related to specific cultural and institutional contexts (Hyland, 2001).”
BackgroundSelf-citationWhat do they mean? Questions in academic writing
HYLAND, K. (2002) · Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse · doi:10.1515/text.2002.021 · Cited by 201 · cited 2×
“…do indeed warrant the view that.. (AL) What has to be recognised is that these issues........ (ME) Questions are the strategy of dialogic involvement par excellence, inviting engagement and bringing the interlocutor into an arena where they can be led to the writer’s viewpoint (Hyland, 2002b).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Cited by
As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation
Hyland, K. (2008) · English for Specific Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001 · Cited by 1,250
Self-citationChange of Attitude? A Diachronic Study of Stance
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (. (2016) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088316650399 · Cited by 268
Self-citationIs academic writing becoming more informal?
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (. (2017) · English for Specific Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001 · Cited by 267
Self-citation‘The fact that’: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing
Jiang, F. (., & Hyland, K. (2015) · Discourse Studies · doi:10.1177/1461445615590719 · Cited by 144
Self-citationGray, B., & Biber, D. (2012) · Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres · doi:10.1057/9781137030825_2 · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Hyland, K.
- Venue
- Discourse Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 173-192
- ISSN
- 1461-4456 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7080
- OpenAlex
- W1987274994
- Cited by
- 1,998
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 201.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1461445605050365
- The paper
- Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
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.
