Discursive legitimation strategies of academic misconduct consulting agencies in Mainland China

While academic integrity research has extensively examined issues like contract cheating and ghostwriting, less attention has been given to commercial services that operate in ethically uncertain but legally unregulated spaces. This study focuses on academic misconduct consulting agencies based in Mainland China that assist Chinese international students in preparing appeals and defenses during academic misconduct hearings. Despite growing visibility, these agencies remain underexplored in the literature. Drawing on Van Leeuwen’s Discursive Legitimacy Analysis framework and extending it with the concept of emotionalization, we conducted a qualitative analysis of website content from 11 such agencies. Our findings reveal that, unlike contract cheating providers who often rely on stigma-deflection strategies, these agencies use a wider range of discursive tactics to establish credibility. These include moralization (emphasizing ethical alignment), authorization (citing professional expertise), rationalization (stressing procedural effectiveness), mythopoesis (sharing illustrative case stories), and emotionalization (using affective language to convey urgency and risk). By presenting themselves as experienced and trustworthy actors, these agencies frame their services as both legitimate and essential for students navigating complex academic procedures abroad. This study contributes to the field of academic integrity by identifying how commercial actors discursively construct legitimacy in spaces where policy guidance is limited. It also invites further inquiry into the implications of such services for academic governance and international student support.