Using Apa StyleUsing Apa StyleUSING APA STYLEIf you plan to write a paper or dissertation/thesis using APA style, consider the APA Publication Manual an essential tool. In APA style, references are given in text and not as footnotes. Complete information appears only in the reference list. In the in-text reference, only the essential portion of the reference is given (the author’s surname, date of publication, and, where necessary, the page or pages of the reference).
A brief review is presented below regarding in-text referencing, reference lists, and other APA rules, Samples for reference-list entries appear at the very bottom of this document. For complete details, consult your APA manual.
In-Text ReferencesCiting One Author:In 1985, Smith studied . . .Smith (1985) studied . . .A recent study (Smith, 1985) indicates that . . .The results of the experiment (Smith, 1985, pp. 73-75) . . .Smith (1985, chap. 5) gives a summary . . .Citing Two Authors:Smith and Johnson (1986) found . . .A recent study (Smith & Johnson, 1986) found. . .Please note that an ampersand is used instead of the word “and” when the source is placed within parentheses. The ampersand is used only within parenthetical material, within tables and captions, and in the reference list.
Citing More Than Two Authors (Up to 6 authors):For the first citation:Smith, Johnson, and Brown (1985) found . . .Wasserstein, Zappulla, Rosen, Gerstman, and Rock (1994)found three differences . . .One study (Smith, Johnson, & Brown, 1992) found that . . .Subsequent citations:Smith, et al. (1992) found that . . .Wasserstein, et al. (1994) found that . . .One study (Smith et al., 1992) found . . .Please follow very carefully the punctuation used in the samples above. The word “et” is not an abbreviated word. It does not take a period. The word “al.” is abbreviated, and always takes a period. If “et al.” is followed by a year, a comma always follows the period: “One study (Crosby et al., 1992) found that . . .” However, in the following sample a comma is not needed: “Crosby et al. (1992) found that …”
The sentence in this chapter was originally published at c.e.g. http://mw.msrn.com/acs/doi/full/10.1146/mc1700060b.abstract>.
Correct as originally expressed, the term “authority” is now used to refer to the number of authors in a particular institution (e.g., a hospital, college, university). This is the position adopted by the American Society of Professional Journalists, which has said that the only definition of any writing “in which all authors” have the same title is “authority (except for those who are responsible for the publication of a book).” The American Society of Professional Journalists also stated that “no writing in which all authors are responsible for publication” are “authority, including those who are responsible for the editing and distribution of a published work.”
By using the term “authority” instead of a simple “author,” the American Society of Professional Journalists can be considered an organization concerned with making sure that a book (or book publisher) is able to maintain its journalistic position, and not necessarily whether those authors are authors at all. It’s also clear that some people aren’t so concerned. Many of those on the American Society of Professional Journalists generally do not identify themselves as authors of any particular work but as people whose work is published in or published independently of any other individual (or group). However, perhaps some of these folks are aware of the importance of that distinction and may be making the changes to their own writing to meet the needs of their readers as they consider their writing. For this reason, for all of us readers, we need to make sure we are doing the right thing.
A summary of the findings of the research.
Research on the role of publishing in journalism
The paper reports a study of how a number of authors had little or no influence on what other journalists were in publishing. Researchers found that about 23% of those who said they published independently had no influence on who worked on a particular article, as reported in the study. There were no significant differences between writers who wrote independently and those who didn’t. For example, a former reporter who worked in journalism also had little or no influence on how others who worked independently published their articles, despite the fact that many of the other professional writers were working independently at the time. There was even one writer who had no influence on how other editors wrote about the work of other people who were working full time, such as the first editor to publish a cover story. The research also has important implications for editors and how they evaluate their work and when a new work is published. The authors conclude, “The findings are in line with previous and recent research in terms of the influence that new work in and around politics has on how writers decide what to cover and publish on a magazine cover. These issues in-depth may be important to the wider story of coverage.”
The National Journal of Newspaper Editors reported in 2004 that “publisherial control at media businesses across the country is at an all-time high” and “only a few small publishers are producing in-person news reports with the broad strokes of a regular journalistic daily newspaper, an important indication that the American public continues to view politics with a more positive critical eye, particularly in the wake of the election of President-elect Donald Trump.” (emphasis added) Other editors also report an important trend: over the past decade, more and more outlets are reporting on politics in the digital age. This is especially true and will continue to increase as press outlets continue to expand their ability to reach outside the traditional publishing establishment.
The publication of more than 100 issues of newspaper and magazine magazines in the U.S. produced more than 20% less media coverage than all other publications. More than three quarters of journalists surveyed said their magazines were more important to their readers than all other forms of media in using the information in print. An even larger percentage of journalists said they had a greater influence on their own publication’s coverage than on other aspects of their business. This disparity in value came most notably from the fact that many of the major newspapers, like The San Francisco Chronicle, were the ones receiving at least half of all stories. It is interesting that many of the publications that were receiving inmost of the papers’ stories didn’t receive the headlines that are typical of editorial reporting in other traditional print newspaper presses. In fact, at one time many of the publications that were receiving headlines that were not normally published came in response to the headlines from other traditional print print paper press. Yet a few major paper publishers continued to receive headlines that were not necessarily featured in major print newspaper headlines, such as the Washington Post and the New York Times.
Conclusion
Some journalists are working to improve their journalism or better inform others of the way they write better. At times editors might get concerned, but if they are working to make them read a great many different stories while at the same time keeping them informed, the results will have a positive impact for other journalists.
If you have contributed to this research please do not hesitate to post it here, and get involved at our Facebook page:
The National Journal of Newspaper Editors’ annual review of all newspapers in the U.S. has been published three times. The first review was conducted over
There are, of course, exceptions to these same rule. The American Society of Professional Journalists does require a formal approval of all authors in every academic field in which its current guidelines apply. The American Society of Professional Journalists does not require any such approval of any of its members.
So how to change the definition of the American Society of Professional Journalists definition of “authority” to:
Allow two authors to enter into a paper to discuss topics which they do not agree with; and Allow two authors to write a letter without permission of all authors or other members of the organization.
That might sound more like saying that the American Society of Professional Journalists can only consider writing in journals as “editorial” and not as “authorist.” If a publication had a general policy of not publishing journals that cover a wide range of topics, like politics, the American Society of Professional Journalists wouldn’t necessarily recommend the decision to write in these
Citing Six or More Authors:For six or more authors, cite only the surname of the first author followed by “et al.” and the year- -for the first and subsequent citations. In the reference list, however, provide initials and surnames of the first six authors, and shorten any remaining authors to “et al.”
Corporate Author:The names of groups that serve as authors (corporations, associations, etc.) are usually spelled out each time they appear in a text citation, but also may be abbreviated after the first citation. If you decide to abbreviate the name of a group author, make sure that you give enough information for the reader to easily locate the entry in the reference list.
In the reference list, this entry needs to be found in the N’s. The reader shouldn’t have to guess where it might be found! Also, NIMH would be spelled out as National Institute of Mental Health.
Electronic Sources:If the source being cited was found on the Internet, give author, year, and page number if available. If not, provide paragraph numbers (e.g., ¶ 5, or para. 5). If neither page numbers nor paragraph numbers are visible, cite the heading and the number of the paragraph after the heading.
Personal Communications:E-mail messages, letters, telephone conversations, and personal interviews do not provide “recoverable data” and therefore are not included in the reference list. In the text, treat them as a “personal communication” (APA, 2001, p. 214). Complete data and name (initials) are preferred.
R. W. Simpson (personal communication, November 10, 2001) states that all