Bibliography sort order output style

I’m sorry that this is a duplicate post, I originally posted it in the How to forum, but I realize this is probably the more appropriate forum.

I’m frustrated because it appears the only way to do this correctly is to do it manually, the problem is :

My PI pointed out to me that our bibliographies are not sorted by anything other than order of appearance.  While this is great because most bibliographies are ordered based on the location they are used in the article, they also should be organized within these subgroups.  The problem is there is no obvious/covenient way to do this as far as I can tell, which means every time I want to add a citation I have to make sure I’m inserting it based on chronological order.

For example when submitting for AJOC:

For my very first citations I insert Roberts 2008, Johnson 2007, Gomez 2010.  

Then in a following paragraph I insert Black 2009, Roberts 2008, Marcel 2007.

As it works now my bibliography it looks like this:

  1. Roberts 2008

  2. Johnson 2007

  3. Gomez 2010

  4. Black, 2009

  5. Marcel, 2007

When for every journal they want it formatted like this:

  1. Johnson 2007

  2. Roberts 2008

  3. Gomez 2010

  4. Marcel, 2007

  5. Black, 2009

Is there a way to modify styles to sort properly?  This seems like a major oversight as it is standard practice.

Please help, let me know if I wasn’t clear it what I am trying to do.

Please go into the other one and options>delete (before someone aswers it)  -but it really doesn’t matter where you post a question.  none of us only read one forum section.  

to achieve this in Endnote (desktop) you would edit the output style. citation>sort, so that citations are sorted by Year - author rather than “like bibliography”.  

Save As to a new output style name.  Change to use this new output style - you will probably have to “select another style” at the top, the first time to have the new output style show up in the dropdown list.  DO NOT save it to the same name as the original.  

I’ve messed with it the way you are describing.  The problem with doing it this way is that now the in-document citations are no longer displayed in numerical order, they are displayed based on year, so in my previous example 

  1. Johnson 2007

  2. Roberts 2008

  3. Gomez 2010

  4. Marcel, 2007

  5. Black, 2009

If I were to cite number 1, 3 and 5 in-text they would be cited as “Content (5,1,3)”

Really, the journal will resolve that – you can’t have it both ways?  

Can you clarify your example of the desired bibliography format. It seems you want to first categorize the order of the bibliography references by journal name but it’s unclear what the secondary sort field would be. Judging by your output example. it doesn’t appear to be either author name or year. So can you clarify what the order would be? It’s possible to sort the references by journal name but the additional sort fields may pose some issues depending on the data.

What you are requesting is not considered standard practice across journals but may be unique to your situation. You might also recheck the journal’s Author Submissions guideline to see if it specifically requests the bibliography be listed in a categorized format based by journal title. If not, a standard bibliography could be submitted and the categorized bibliography reference format will be attended to by the Journal’s editing/production staff.

I thought he meant in a subsequent cite of those three, which had been included in previous text, they would now be reordered by date and look odd.  

Might be but hard to say definitively what the poster wants. I interpreted “When for every journal they want it formatted like this:” and mentioning “subgroups” as the user wanting to first categorize the references by journal title. Or does the comment about “every journal” actually references “standard practice”?

jmgreenb, could you clarify?

Yes, I apologize for the confusion, I was referring to standard practice, Leanne is correct in what I am looking to do.

“a subsequent cite of those three, which had been included in previous text, they would now be reordered by date and look odd.”

I would want the in-text citation numbers to remain ordered numerically, while the numbering of the bibliography be sorted by order of appearance, however the order of appearance to be sorted by date.

As I said.  This is not possible with the current versions of Endnote.  You might try requesting a feature that would allow the citations to be reordered on the fly, in the suggestions forum (and copy this thread link for an explanation as to why, and perhaps the developers will take note.    In my experience, publishers will address these indyosyncratic house style requirements during the copy-editing stage.  Never had a paper rejected for something like this!