Introduction
For the purpose of information, I compiled some of the Blogs regarding referenced list. I did not change or alter any of their Blogs. Just take time to read and if you have any questions you may post at the comment box below.
In APA Style, include a reference list rather than a bibliography with your paper.
What’s the difference? A reference list consists of all sources cited in the text of a paper, listed alphabetically by author’s surname. A bibliography, however, may include resources that were consulted but not cited in the text as well as an annotated description of each one. Bibliographies may be organized chronologically, or by subject, rather than alphabetically.
If you have been given an assignment that asks for a bibliography, consult your instructor for more specifics about the required format.
What’s a Reference List For?
Sometimes APA Style is less about the minutiae of citation and more about the big picture. For example, recently we heard from some students who wanted to know why everything in the reference list had to be cited in the text. They argued that they had read many more books than they could cite and felt that they were not getting full credit for their work.
The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) says, "Each reference cited in text must appear in the reference list, and each entry in the reference list must be cited in text" (p. 174). To understand this rule, we have to consider the big picture: What’s a reference list for, anyway?
For many students, the purpose of the reference list is to prove that they completed the assignment. They were assigned a research topic; they researched the heck out of it; and the reference list is there to demonstrate their hard work.
In the scholarly disciplines that use the APA Style of author–date citation, however, the purpose of the reference list is twofold: (a) It allows the author to credit the work of others that directly influenced the present work and document any facts that are not common knowledge; and (b) it gives interested readers the information necessary to identify and retrieve those sources. Thus, there is no reason to include uncited sources in the reference list.
Other documentation systems, such as those based on the Chicago Manual of Style, use a bibliography rather than a reference list. A bibliography can be more expansive, covering works that were consulted by the author or recommended for the reader but not cited in the text itself.
If you're writing in APA Style, however, that kind of bibliography is not an option. Keep those extra sources in mind for your next paper, and remember: Cite what you use, use what you cite.
If you're writing in APA Style, however, that kind of bibliography is not an option. Keep those extra sources in mind for your next paper, and remember: Cite what you use, use what you cite.
What Belongs in the Reference List?
By Jeff Hume-PratuchDear APA Style Experts,I’m doing a paper for a psychology class that requires our opinion on “the most powerful influences on your view of the world.” I want to cite a conversation I had with my grandmother, but I don't know how to put this information on the reference page. Please advise.Signed,
All in the Family
We devote a lot of time on the APA Style blog to different ways of formatting references, both in text and in the reference list, but have you ever thought about what qualifies as a reference?
The purpose of the reference list is to “acknowledge the work of previous scholars and provide a reliable way to locate it” (APA Publication Manual, 6th ed., p. 37). Let’s break this statement down and apply it to the question at hand.
Acknowledge the Work of Others
If someone else’s ideas, theories, or research have directly influenced your work, you need to credit the source in text and in the reference list. This applies whether you are directly quoting or paraphrasing the work in question. If you are building on work that you yourself have previously published, you need to cite that as well. This enables your readers to follow the idea back to its source.
If someone else’s ideas, theories, or research have directly influenced your work, you need to credit the source in text and in the reference list. This applies whether you are directly quoting or paraphrasing the work in question. If you are building on work that you yourself have previously published, you need to cite that as well. This enables your readers to follow the idea back to its source.
Placing a source in your reference list also implies that you have personally read it. If you read Smith & Hawkshaw’s (2008) opinion of The Hound of the Baskervilles, but not Conan Doyle’s work itself, don’t put the latter in the list. What you have there is a secondary source (p. 178).
In addition, you should consider the context in which you are writing. In most cases, your source should have some scholarly relevance. For a personal reflection paper, it is appropriate to quote one’s grandmother; for a dissertation on child development, not so much (unless one’s grandmother happens to be Anna Freud).
Provide a Reliable Path to the Source
Part of the purpose of a reference is to lead your reader back to the sources you used. For a book or journal article, this path is pretty straightforward, but for some sources we need to dig deeper. Ask yourself, “How would someone else get here?”
Part of the purpose of a reference is to lead your reader back to the sources you used. For a book or journal article, this path is pretty straightforward, but for some sources we need to dig deeper. Ask yourself, “How would someone else get here?”
In some cases—like a private conversation—the answer is, “They can’t.” No one else is privy to that conversation with your grandmother. The wisdom she passed on to you is not recoverable by other researchers, so it does not go in the reference list.
This kind of source (private letters and e-mail, personal conversations, phone calls, etc.) is called a personal communication (p. 179). Cite it in text only, give initials as well as the surname of the person involved, and give as precise a date as possible:
My grandmother’s advice was, “Never pass up a chance to eat, sit down, or use a clean restroom” (S. Dean, personal communication, May 14, 1980).
The same approach would apply to notes you took during a lecture, or class handouts that are not posted elsewhere (e.g., the instructor’s website), or a spontaneous piece of street theater.
What About Research Interviews?
One exception to this guideline applies to participants that you interview in your own research. These interviews are qualitative data; they’re part of the research on which you are reporting and do not constitute the work of others. They should never be individually cited or treated as personal communications in APA Style, because this could compromise confidentiality. Researchers are prohibited by the APA Ethics Code from disclosing personally identifying information about research participants (pp. 17—18). Depending on the circumstances, such information could include the date of the interview as well as surname and initials.
One exception to this guideline applies to participants that you interview in your own research. These interviews are qualitative data; they’re part of the research on which you are reporting and do not constitute the work of others. They should never be individually cited or treated as personal communications in APA Style, because this could compromise confidentiality. Researchers are prohibited by the APA Ethics Code from disclosing personally identifying information about research participants (pp. 17—18). Depending on the circumstances, such information could include the date of the interview as well as surname and initials.
How then should you handle the need to quote from participant interviews? Some authors quote participants without distinguishing them at all, like this: “Indeed, a comment by one of our participants illustrates some of these complex issues: [quote follows without other attribution].”
Others identify participants by demographic or other data: “At my age I think we know who we are and what we are. (Female participant, 69 years of age).” You can also identify participants with letters (Participant A, Participant B), nicknames (Sonny, Tracey), or by role (Doctor, Patient).
Final Thoughts
As you write your paper, remember to cite previously published work that influenced you, that you have actually read, and that other researchers can recover. That will make your reference list both useful and complete.
As you write your paper, remember to cite previously published work that influenced you, that you have actually read, and that other researchers can recover. That will make your reference list both useful and complete.
Order in the Reference List! Or the Case of the Maddening Initials
by Anne Breitenbach
It’s true confessions time: I copyedited APA journals for years and even taught APA Style to APA copy editors, and yet I’ve tripped over some really basic issues more times than I like to admit. One issue that has tied me in knots several times is how to order a reference list when there are authors with the same surname and almostthe same initials.
Let me show you an example of what I mean. Suppose you had the following citations arranged in this order in a reference list (they really don’t have DOIs and they were read from hard copy, so they don’t need to have the journal homepage URLs, though see these previous posts on when to use a DOI and when to use a URL):
- Foorman, B. (2007). Primary prevention in classroom reading instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 24–30.
- Foorman, B. R. (1995). Research on the great debate: Code-oriented versus whole language approaches to reading. School Psychology Review, 24, 376–393.
Is it in the right order? Maybe yes, maybe no. The correct order depends on whether B. Foorman and B. R. Foorman are actually the same person. Here’s what you need to consider:
• Rule 6.25 of the Publication Manual directs us to “arrange entries in alphabetical order by the surname of the first author followed by initials of the author’s given name.”
However
• We are also instructed to order several works by the same first author by year of publication, the earliest first.
• And works by different first authors with the same surname are ordered alphabetically by the first initial—in addition, citations in text should include initials with the surname of the first author to differentiate between the sources.
So our order depends on the identity of the mysterious Foorman(s). Are there two authors or one? If you don’t know, then you’ll have to research the issue (and keeping notes during the research process that include full names is an excellent idea, as that makes your job now much simpler). The logical first step is to go look at the research and see whether the reference is correct as given. However, if the initials have all been provided correctly, what other evidence is there that allows you to make an educated assessment of whether this is the same person? Are there complete first names provided in the byline or the author note? Is there an institutional affiliation or a history of publishing with the same people and on the same topic? Is there an email address that would allow you to ask directly? Can you find an article about the person or curriculum vitae that lists publications?
If on the basis of your research you are comfortably sure that these are thesame person, reverse the order. The earlier reference should come first even though the initials aren’t exactly the same.
If your research directs you to the conclusion that you have two differentauthors, the order is correct as is, but you’ll need to remember to add the initials for each author when the reference is cited in text.
Should you have a publishing career yourself, please try to publish your manuscripts with the same format of your name throughout your career. Researchers and copy editors the world over will bless you.
by Anne Breitenbach
It’s true confessions time: I copyedited APA journals for years and even taught APA Style to APA copy editors, and yet I’ve tripped over some really basic issues more times than I like to admit. One issue that has tied me in knots several times is how to order a reference list when there are authors with the same surname and almostthe same initials.
Let me show you an example of what I mean. Suppose you had the following citations arranged in this order in a reference list (they really don’t have DOIs and they were read from hard copy, so they don’t need to have the journal homepage URLs, though see these previous posts on when to use a DOI and when to use a URL):
- Foorman, B. (2007). Primary prevention in classroom reading instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 24–30.
- Foorman, B. R. (1995). Research on the great debate: Code-oriented versus whole language approaches to reading. School Psychology Review, 24, 376–393.
Is it in the right order? Maybe yes, maybe no. The correct order depends on whether B. Foorman and B. R. Foorman are actually the same person. Here’s what you need to consider:
• Rule 6.25 of the Publication Manual directs us to “arrange entries in alphabetical order by the surname of the first author followed by initials of the author’s given name.”
However
• We are also instructed to order several works by the same first author by year of publication, the earliest first.
• And works by different first authors with the same surname are ordered alphabetically by the first initial—in addition, citations in text should include initials with the surname of the first author to differentiate between the sources.
• And works by different first authors with the same surname are ordered alphabetically by the first initial—in addition, citations in text should include initials with the surname of the first author to differentiate between the sources.
So our order depends on the identity of the mysterious Foorman(s). Are there two authors or one? If you don’t know, then you’ll have to research the issue (and keeping notes during the research process that include full names is an excellent idea, as that makes your job now much simpler). The logical first step is to go look at the research and see whether the reference is correct as given. However, if the initials have all been provided correctly, what other evidence is there that allows you to make an educated assessment of whether this is the same person? Are there complete first names provided in the byline or the author note? Is there an institutional affiliation or a history of publishing with the same people and on the same topic? Is there an email address that would allow you to ask directly? Can you find an article about the person or curriculum vitae that lists publications?
If on the basis of your research you are comfortably sure that these are thesame person, reverse the order. The earlier reference should come first even though the initials aren’t exactly the same.
If your research directs you to the conclusion that you have two differentauthors, the order is correct as is, but you’ll need to remember to add the initials for each author when the reference is cited in text.
Should you have a publishing career yourself, please try to publish your manuscripts with the same format of your name throughout your career. Researchers and copy editors the world over will bless you.
If on the basis of your research you are comfortably sure that these are thesame person, reverse the order. The earlier reference should come first even though the initials aren’t exactly the same.
If your research directs you to the conclusion that you have two differentauthors, the order is correct as is, but you’ll need to remember to add the initials for each author when the reference is cited in text.
Should you have a publishing career yourself, please try to publish your manuscripts with the same format of your name throughout your career. Researchers and copy editors the world over will bless you.
Punctuating the Reference List Entry
by Chelsea Lee
The basic APA Style reference list entry follows a familiar pattern: It can be divided up into four parts (author, date, title, and source), and each of these parts is separated from the others by punctuation. The following post shows in more detail how this process works and answers two common reference punctuation-related questions.
Basic Punctuation in a Reference List Entry
To begin, let’s look at a basic, run-of-the-mill reference list entry for a journal article:
Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 12–19. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.59.1.12
- The highlighted periods show how punctuation comes after the author names, date (which goes inside parentheses), title, and source.
- Note that you should not add punctuation marks after DOIs or URLs in reference list entries. These can function as live links to lead readers directly to article information; thus the precise alphanumeric string (without added punctuation) is needed.
The many reference list entries in Chapter 7 of the Publication Manual also show this punctuation pattern, and we encourage you to look there for more examples.
Next we’ll answer two common punctuation questions:
What Do I Do When the Title Ends in a Question Mark or Exclamation Point?
Authors and readers often ask how to deal with references that already contain punctuation—for example, a title that ends in a question mark or exclamation point. The short answer is, keep the original punctuation and do not add any extra. In the example below, the question mark at the end of the title takes the place of the period we would have otherwise inserted. There is no need to have two punctuation marks in a row.
Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Stack, A. D. (1999). Catharsis, aggression, and persuasive influence: Self-fulfilling or self-defeating prophecies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 367–376. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.3.367
Should There Always Be a Period After the Author’s Name?
In the above examples, the authors were individuals whose names were listed in the format of surname, first initials. Because the initials already included punctuation, it was not necessary to add any additional punctuation in order for the author part of the entry to end in punctuation. However, when the author is a group, organization, institution, or something similar, there still needs to be a period at the end of the author piece of the reference. Here is an example of a reference with a group author (note the period after "Association"):
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
Likewise, even when there is no author and the title moves to the author position, the rhythm of the punctuation stays constant. Here is an example of an unauthored entry in an online dictionary:
Reliability. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary (11th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
- Here, periods come after each element, but again there is no period after the URL, to aid in retrievability.
- Note that when the title includes parenthetical or bracketed information, there is no period between the title and the opening parenthesis/bracket, but there is one after the closing parenthesis/bracket to show the end of the title part of the reference.
Sources:
1. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/07/punctuating-the-reference-list-entry.html
2. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/10/order-in-the-reference-list-or-the-case-of-the-maddening-initials.html
3. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/10/what-belongs-in-the-reference-list.html
4. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/02/whats-a-reference-list-for.html
by Chelsea Lee
The basic APA Style reference list entry follows a familiar pattern: It can be divided up into four parts (author, date, title, and source), and each of these parts is separated from the others by punctuation. The following post shows in more detail how this process works and answers two common reference punctuation-related questions.
Basic Punctuation in a Reference List Entry
To begin, let’s look at a basic, run-of-the-mill reference list entry for a journal article:
| Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 12–19. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.59.1.12 |
- The highlighted periods show how punctuation comes after the author names, date (which goes inside parentheses), title, and source.
- Note that you should not add punctuation marks after DOIs or URLs in reference list entries. These can function as live links to lead readers directly to article information; thus the precise alphanumeric string (without added punctuation) is needed.
The many reference list entries in Chapter 7 of the Publication Manual also show this punctuation pattern, and we encourage you to look there for more examples.
Next we’ll answer two common punctuation questions:
What Do I Do When the Title Ends in a Question Mark or Exclamation Point?
Authors and readers often ask how to deal with references that already contain punctuation—for example, a title that ends in a question mark or exclamation point. The short answer is, keep the original punctuation and do not add any extra. In the example below, the question mark at the end of the title takes the place of the period we would have otherwise inserted. There is no need to have two punctuation marks in a row.
| Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Stack, A. D. (1999). Catharsis, aggression, and persuasive influence: Self-fulfilling or self-defeating prophecies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 367–376. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.3.367 |
Should There Always Be a Period After the Author’s Name?
In the above examples, the authors were individuals whose names were listed in the format of surname, first initials. Because the initials already included punctuation, it was not necessary to add any additional punctuation in order for the author part of the entry to end in punctuation. However, when the author is a group, organization, institution, or something similar, there still needs to be a period at the end of the author piece of the reference. Here is an example of a reference with a group author (note the period after "Association"):
| American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author. |
Likewise, even when there is no author and the title moves to the author position, the rhythm of the punctuation stays constant. Here is an example of an unauthored entry in an online dictionary:
| Reliability. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary (11th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability |
- Here, periods come after each element, but again there is no period after the URL, to aid in retrievability.
- Note that when the title includes parenthetical or bracketed information, there is no period between the title and the opening parenthesis/bracket, but there is one after the closing parenthesis/bracket to show the end of the title part of the reference.
Sources:
1. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/07/punctuating-the-reference-list-entry.html
2. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/10/order-in-the-reference-list-or-the-case-of-the-maddening-initials.html
3. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/10/what-belongs-in-the-reference-list.html
4. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/02/whats-a-reference-list-for.html
No comments:
Post a Comment