How to Document Sources

Unfortunately, each discipline has its own standards for how to cite material. While interdisciplinary work would be much simpler if scholars could agree on one or two major citation systems, presently dozens of citation systems are endorsed by various professional organizations. For example, English teachers and scholars involved in composition and rhetoric follow the guidelines prescribed by the Modern Language Association (MLA).

In turn, psychologists and others in the social sciences follow those established by the American Psychological Association (APA). The bible for editors of scholarly journals and university presses is The Chicago Manual of Style. Biologists use The Council of Biology Editors Style Manual. Many lawyers use Harvard Law Review's A Uniform System of Citation. Chemists follow The American Chemical Society's Handbook for Authors. And engineers have numerous style formats to choose from, such as the Engineers' Joint Council's Recommended Practice for Style of References in Engineering Publications, the American Society for Mechanical Engineering MS-4: An ASME Paper, or the American Institute of Industrial Engineers' The Complete Guide for Writing Technical Articles.

Avoid excessive quoting

Instructors do not want to read miscellaneous quotes thrown together helter-skelter. Documents that rely extensively on quotes tend to lack voice or authority. If you place quotes after every few lines, your ideas and voice take second stage to other people's ideas and voices, which contradicts your reason for writing – to share your thoughts. Although no firm guideline can be prescribed, stylists often suggest limiting direct quotes to 10 percent of the total length of your document.

You will, however, occasionally find it useful to quote directly. For example, you might want to provide a direct quote if the material goes to the heart of your discussion or argument; if it is so well written that it cannot be condensed further; if it contains an eyewitness account of an event; or if it is written by a prestigious scholar whose comments are crucial to your purpose.

Ensure that paraphrased sections are accurate and properly cited

When you paraphrase another scholar's original ideas, you must acknowledge your indebtedness. This does not mean, however, that you should cite everything you read. Instead, you need to determine whether a particular insight is considered given information by other scholars in the field. In other words, if many scholars are expressing similar ideas or insights, then you may be able to consider this information to be public domain information. When in doubt about whether an insight is unique to a particular scholar, however, you should cite the scholar.

Also, when reviewing your paraphrased passages, check to ensure that you have not repeated any phrases from the secondary source without putting quotation marks around them. If you have read an article many times by another scholar, you can easily repeat the syntax and word choice without being aware of it, so it truly makes sense to take a second look at the original source. Taking three or more words from a secondary source amounts to more than sloppy scholarship: it is plagiarism. Naturally, you should also ensure that you have not misrepresented the secondary source by omitting the context or crucial qualifiers from the direct quote or in your paraphrased statement.

Power quote to establish a persuasive persona

One of the conventions for introductions is to bow to predecessors and acknowledge your indebtedness to their ground-breaking, seminal research. If space limitations prohibit you from discoursing at length on the various works that contributed to your thinking on a subject, you can gather them together under the umbrella of a general, inclusive statement, as demonstrated in the samples below:

A number of researchers ( Bellack, Kliebard, Hyman, & Smith 1966; Cazden, John, & Hymes, 1972; Barnes, 1969; Flanders , 1979; Sinclair & Coulthard, 1978) have analyzed the language of classrooms and have come to the common conclusion that students have access to a limited number of language functions. ( Gere and Abbott374-375)

In recent years, several reader response theorists ( Bleich, 1975, 1978; Culler, 1975; Fish, 1970, 1976a, 1976b; Holland, 1973, 1975a, 1975b; Rosenblatt, 1976, 1978) have explored the unique role of the reader in the literary experience. Among the variety of explanations for the respective roles of the reader and text in the creation of meaning, some studies have demonstrated that readers' cognitive frameworks and psychological predispositions affect their response to literature ( Applebee, 1975, 1976a, 1976b; Holland, 1975b; Kuehn, 1974; Peters & Blues, 1978; Petrosky, 1976; Thompson, 1974). ( Hynds 386))

While power quoting can be an effective way to highlight important information, you can sometimes be more concise by citing one or two important studies. Also, check to ensure that the scholars and studies that you have grouped together truly support the statement you have made. If informed readers believe that you have bundled together studies that actually disagree in their conclusions or that don't truly support the assertion you have made, you will lose credibility no matter how strong the rest of your argument is.