Almagro Holgado, ManuelBordonaba Plou, DavidVillauneva Fernández, Neftalí2024-02-022024-02-022023-10-26Almagro, M., Bordonaba-Plou, D. & Villanueva, N. Retraction in public settings. Synthese 202, 137 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04348-30039-785710.1007/s11229-023-04348-3https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/98164Financiación en Acceso Abierto gracias al convenio CRUE-CSIC con Springer Nature.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.engAttribution 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/journal article1573-0964https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-023-04348-3https://produccioncientifica.ucm.es/documentos/6546ed0232348009d228eaccopen access81:1RetractionRelativismContextEvaluationPublicFilosofía72 Filosofía7299 Otras Especialidades Filosóficas7202.07 Filosofía del Lenguaje