Critical Discourse Studies (CDS), driven by its problem-oriented nature, utilizes an interdisciplinary approach to examine social issues and discourse practices. Public relations (PR) is a significant field influencing CDS, particularly in areas such as media image, crisis communication, strategic management, and corporate social responsibility. While CDS has been used to critique PR, less research explores the reciprocal benefit of PR to CDS. This study adopts van Leeuwen's (2005) integrationist model of interdisciplinary research, which emphasizes equal yet interdependent disciplines working towards a holistic understanding. The study investigates PR concepts ("image," "stakeholder," and "strategy") used in CDS journal article abstracts (2000-2020) to demonstrate how PR concepts instrumentally enhance CDS research by providing communication analytic tools and helping interpret management power use and discursive patterns. The analysis contributes to understanding the interdisciplinary development of CDS and the mutual benefits of PR and CDS, viewed from both linguistic and non-linguistic perspectives.

The paper reviews the history and development of Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) as an interdisciplinary field, highlighting its evolution from its origins in the early 1990s. It discusses the three models of interdisciplinarity proposed by van Leeuwen (2005): centralist, pluralist, and integrationist, favoring the integrationist model for its emphasis on equal but interdependent disciplines. The paper then examines the existing literature on the influence of public relations (PR) on CDS research, focusing on how CDS has been used to critique PR practices in different areas. It reviews different definitions of PR, highlighting its focus on managing relationships with stakeholders to build and maintain institutional reputation through strategic communication. The paper emphasizes the gap in research exploring the benefits of PR concepts and theories for CDS.

This study employs a quantitative and qualitative approach to analyze the use of PR concepts in CDS journal article abstracts from the period 2000-2020. Data was collected from the Web of Science database, focusing on articles indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI). The search terms included "critical discourse analysis" and "critical discourse studies." After screening for relevance, 2501 articles were included. AntConc software was used for word frequency analysis. The study focused on the three PR concepts: "image," "stakeholder," and "strategy." Initially, the raw counts of these words were determined. Following this, a qualitative review and coding process was undertaken, excluding examples that lacked a PR contextual usage or did not fall within previously identified PR-related topics within CDS research (media image, crisis communication, strategic management, and corporate social responsibility). Specific selection criteria were established, eliminating literal interpretations of PR concepts and focusing on examples relevant to typical PR contexts or broad PR issues. The final dataset consisted of 77 examples for "image," 77 for "stakeholder," and 370 for "strategy." The analysis examined both the linguistic realization and discursive use of these concepts, exploring how they contribute to the instrumentalization of CDS research.

The analysis of the 77 instances of "image" revealed its use in representing countries, organizations, and individuals, often with a positive, negative, or neutral orientation. This semantic negotiation helped critique image-building strategies, allowing the researchers to analyze the ideological underpinnings behind these representations. The term "image" frequently co-occurred with "identity" and "brand," highlighting the interplay between image construction and identity projection. The study also examined the 77 instances of "stakeholder," finding that CDS researchers employ it to identify and categorize different actors participating in the discourse, clarifying the study's focus. Its application extended beyond typical PR contexts, such as those within the business world, towards non-neoliberal fields like education, healthcare and political governance. The most significant number of instances in the analysis concerned the word 'strategy' with 370 examples. The analysis categorized these into linguistic tools, social actions and discursive strategies. The use of 'strategy' in CDS research focused more on broader discursive strategies than the more granular linguistic tactics or behavioral aspects found in the literature, representing an approach that prioritizes critical discussion over detailed linguistic analysis. The study observed an unbalanced emphasis on discursive strategies, suggesting a shift in CDS research towards a more macro-level of analysis.

The findings support the argument that PR concepts are instrumental in CDS research. The strategic use of "image," "stakeholder," and "strategy" enables researchers to focus their analysis, clarify the ideological context, and better understand the deployment of power. However, the study also points to potential limitations, such as the risk of oversimplifying complex identities by equating them solely with image representation, or the potential for the normalization of PR concepts in non-PR contexts. The unbalanced focus on discursive strategies, to the detriment of linguistic elements, might limit the depth of some CDS studies. This raises questions about achieving a balance between utilizing PR concepts for enhanced analysis and maintaining the critical and nuanced approach inherent to CDS.

This study demonstrates that the strategic use of public relations concepts in critical discourse studies acts as a valuable tool for analysis and interpretation, focusing the research and aiding in critiquing the social phenomena in question. Although there is potential for over-reliance on these concepts, leading to a diminished scope of analysis, the study highlights the mutually beneficial relationship between the two fields, enriching their respective theoretical and methodological approaches. Future research could explore a wider range of PR concepts and analyze full articles instead of abstracts for a more complete understanding.

The study's limitations include the selection of only three PR concepts and the use of abstracts rather than full articles. The sample of abstracts was limited to English-language publications available in the Web of Science database which could skew the findings toward certain perspectives or geographical locations. Future research could address these limitations by expanding the scope of concepts, employing a wider range of databases and including articles from a variety of languages.