RT Journal Article
T1 Retraction in public settings
A1 Almagro Holgado, Manuel
A1 Bordonaba Plou, David
A1 Villauneva Fernández, Neftalí
AB Several recent studies (see Knobe & Yalcin, 2014; Khoo, 2015; Marques, 2018; Kneer, 2021a) address linguistic retraction from an experimental perspective. In these studies, speakers’ intuitions regarding the mandatory nature of retraction are tested. Pace MacFarlane, competent speakers (of English) do not consider retraction to be obligatory. This paper examines two methodological features of the above-mentioned studies: they do not take into consideration the difference between public and private contexts; neither do they incorporate the distinction between evaluative and descriptive statements. In this paper, we report the results of two studies conducted to empirically test the hypothesis that retraction is, above all, a public phenomenon. Our findings show that context exerts a significant effect on speakers’ attitudes toward retraction.
SN 0039-7857
YR 2023
FD 2023-10-26
LK https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/98164
UL https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/98164
LA eng
NO Almagro, M., Bordonaba-Plou, D. & Villanueva, N. Retraction in public settings. Synthese 202, 137 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04348-3
NO Financiación en Acceso Abierto gracias al convenio CRUE-CSIC con Springer Nature.
NO Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (España)
NO Junta de Andalucía
NO Fundación BBVA
NO FiloLab Unidad de Excelencia de la Universidad de Granada
NO Universidad Complutense de Madrid
DS Docta Complutense
RD 15 dic 2025