[Purpose/Significance] In response to the persistent ambiguity and conflation of terminology surrounding citation breaches in academic discourse, this study aims to propose a conceptual analytical framework for the classification and definition of citation breach terms, in order to promote research integrity in China and strengthen academic norms. [Method/Process] By systematically reviewing academic literature and policy documents from both domestic and international sources, the article extracts definitional features and usage contexts of citation breach terms. It constructs a dual-dimensional classification framework based on "research misconduct/questionable research practices" and "increase citation count/decrease citation count/no impact on citation count", alongside a three-element conceptual framework comprising "motivation–process–utility". [Result/Conclusion] Grounded in this framework, the article integrates and reconstructs the terminology system for citation breaches, establishing 11 primary core terms—honorary citation, excessive citation, citation contamination, referencing error, unintentional citation omission, citation bias, citation copying, citation misrepresentation, citation manipulation, concealed citation, fabricated citation—and clarifies the characteristics of each term across the dimensions of motivation, process, and utility. This provides a more operational tool for future institutional governance.