Abstract

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Background:</i></b> Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports are essential for companies to persuade stakeholders of their commitment to social, economic, and environmental responsibilities. This persuasion is to a large degree determined by how companies construct their stance in discourse. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Literature review:</i></b> Among efforts in academic discourse, stance analysis of shipping industry CSR reporting remains unexplored. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Research questions:</i></b> 1. How are stance resources distributed in COSCO Shipping and Maersk's CSR discourse? 2. How do similarities and differences between institutional speakers instantiate their stakeholder-oriented communication strategies? 3. Which stance markers show significant changes over time, and what factors drive these changes? <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Methodology:</i></b> This study employed corpus linguistics and discourse analysis of CSR reports (2016-2022) of COSCO Shipping and of Maersk. Python and WordSmith 8.0 were used for stance feature retrieval and frequency analysis, and hierarchical clustering analysis was conducted on hedges and boosters. Chi-square tests evaluated differences in stance marker distribution, while diachronic analysis examined changes over time. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Results and conclusion:</i></b> Maersk employs more stance markers of hedges, attitude markers, and general self-mentions, reflecting a more personal communication style, while COSCO Shipping favors boosters and formal self-references, indicating an authoritative approach. We argue that these features are informed by the contrast between European rationalism and Eastern empiricism in corporate communication. Our novel four-category classification of self-mentions (general, specific reference, group, and affiliated) addresses the complexities of shipping corporate discourse. Diachronic analysis shows stance marker usage fluctuations, particularly during global events like the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings develop a stance framework, offering insights in terms of stance construction for effective cross-cultural CSR communication to foster global cooperation on shared social responsibilities.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2025-06-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2025.3561987
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (2)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Written Communication
Also cites 52 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1002/9781118083246
  2. 10.1075/ps.7.1.03bon
  3. 10.1002/csr.1933
  4. 10.17398/2340-2784.43.155
  5. 10.1111/1911-3846.12838
  6. 10.1007/978-3-319-46849-5
  7. 10.1016/j.accfor.2012.02.003
  8. 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
  9. 10.1093/applin/amw058
  10. 10.1177/1461445605050365
  11. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001
  12. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0008
  13. 10.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.0001
  14. 10.1075/pbns
  15. 10.4324/9780203783771
  16. 10.4324/9781003300847-6
  17. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
  18. 10.1515/text-2021-0156
  19. 10.1016/j.esp.2022.10.006
  20. 10.1108/07363760110410281
  21. 10.1007/s10551-013-1633-2
  22. 10.1080/13504851.2015.1071464
  23. 10.1002/csr.1398
  24. 10.1016/j.esp.2023.01.004
  25. 10.1002/csr.2472
  26. 10.5539/elt.v11n11p122
  27. 10.1080/01638538809544689
  28. 10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93
  29. 10.1075/pbns.115
  30. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001
  31. 10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100973
  32. 10.1111/ijal.12502
  33. 10.1075/etc.7.1.05fu
  34. 10.1075/ijcl.21080.cur
  35. 10.17398/2340-2784.47.93
  36. 10.1057/s41599-024-03322-9
  37. 10.1515/text-2020-0040
  38. 10.1016/j.esp.2024.06.001
  39. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.06.015
  40. 10.1080/18366503.2022.2164411
  41. 10.1002/csr.287
  42. 10.1075/ijcl.22123.fuo
  43. 10.1177/001316446002000104
  44. 10.1007/978-3-319-21903-5_8
  45. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.01.008
  46. 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00077-0
  47. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.09.013
  48. 10.17398/2340-2784.39.14
  49. 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106868
  50. 10.1186/s12544-022-00566-x
  51. 10.1057/s41278-021-00196-5
  52. 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106339