Hello
I use OpenOffice on a Mac (Cite While You Write not supported) and RTF scan to replace my in-text references. How can I avoid the brackets?
Eg {Dyer, #28} says… becomes (Dyer) says… instead of Dyer says…
Thanks a lot
Michael
The simplest option is to type “Dyer” in. If you then put {#28} in after, it will be referenced, but not show. (but don’t you need the year?)
Hi Leanne
Thanks for your answer. I am aware of the fact that I can type in:
Ferlie, Fitzgerald, Wood, & Hawkins’s {, 2005 #44} idea of …
However, I want the name of the authors to be flexible and follow the citation rule I choose. That is why I posted my question.
Regards
Message Edited by mims on 10-28-2009 05:31 PM
Not easily accomplished, and other threads discuss some ways to accomplish. Try
http://community.thomsonreuters.com/ts/board/message?board.id=en-files&message.id=784#M784
or
or
http://community.thomsonreuters.com/ts/board/message?board.id=en-howto&message.id=2556#M2556
or – oh you get the idea…
It has also been discussed in some other some of the open source software forums, and hasn’t been implemented there either…
Hi Leanne
I understand, thanks. I will edit the passages where I want the name of the authors outside brackets manually.
Thanks
Michael
Actually, this could be our “product suggestion”. This is something we often get questions in this forum.
Look at the second post of this X4 Wish list thread.
If you agree, join the voice, and add a reply like “I want this feature with the next version!”
Or, you can create independent thread detailing exactly what you want, and more.
p.s. (From here is my personal opinion about this type of citation style).
I don’t use (or I don’t like) “Smith et al. hypothesized that blah blah…” or “Schwartz et al. investigated that blah blah …” type of sentences in my writing. This is because, in my field, the first authors are too often “fellows” in the lab, and may not represent the entire lab who drove the study or raised the hypothesis for the first time. Actual person who is responsible is very often the author “close to the last” (or senior, corresponding, principal, …whatever you name it). Therefore, I usually write my in-text citation like “Other group hypothesized that blah blah…” or “Another study demonstrated that blah blah…”, and then add the citation at the end. If I need to compare two studies, I usually goes like “One study demonstrated…(1), whereas another indicated different outcomes (2)” something like that.
This style of writing makes me feel like, “I’m referring to everybody included as authors of this paper”, rather than picking up the first author (or sometimes senior author), as if the single person had the hypothesis or did the study. Of course, when I really need to mention about the name of the first or senior author, then I always include “et al” such that other authors are also acknowledged. But very often, I don’t know who is actual senior author (or principal investigator) in the author list unless I do the search of the grant funding and/or deeply know the history of the particular field. Therefore, it is “safer” to cite the paper as a unit, rather than picking up the name of the first author, or senior author. I heard instances like “hey, I did that study, but not the person you mentioned in your paper”, kind of response from either first or the last authors. You can imagine such instances may result in conflicts and battle among people. Authorship is such a sensitive issue, which is not the focus of this thread, but remotely relevant to the style of writing. So, again, this is my personal opinin, but wanted to express here.
Best regards,
Message Edited by myoshigi on 11-01-2009 10:21 AM
1 Like
Hear! Hear! And when I do know the work well enough, I might say “Most relevent Author” and colleagues have demonstrated [insert finding] (insert full citation)… which would really make any sort of automated handling pretty complicated!
@myoshigi wrote:
p.s. (From here is my personal opinion about this type of citation style).
I don’t use (or I don’t like) “Smith et al. hypothesized that blah blah…” or “Schwartz et al. investigated that blah blah …” type of sentences in my writing.
Thanks, I added a post in the wish list thread. I agree with the importance to give credit to all researchers involved. In business there are cases where one or two authors produce new theory.