Science style: citation within footnote?

EndNote EndNote How To
1

Hi,

I am using the Science style and would like to place a citation within a footnote, e.g.:

[within body of paper]

Controlling for other personal features slightly reduces this effect (23). 

[in footnote / citation section]

  1. Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online. 

[skipping some entries]

  1. Twenty personal features (e.g., age and marital status) predicted duration-weighted enjoyment at work (16). 

Is this possible?

I apologize if this is obvious or has already been answered - I searched this forum but did not see this addressed directly.

2

Yes. From the EndNote tools in Word, select the “Insert Note” command. In Word 2007, this is under the “Insert Citation” menu.

3

Hi John,

Thanks very much for your reply.

I may be missing something but that is not working for me.

When I click -Insert Note- and then type in the text field, I can no longer click on -Insert Citation- or -Insert Note-.

I also tried -Insert Note- then typing “{NOTE: note text here}” in the text field. That is, I put the following text in the -Insert Note- popup box:

This is meant to be a note with a note in it {NOTE: This is the note within a note}.

However, this did not work either – the first note worked fine but then the text in brackets did not convert to a note. That is, the final output in my Word document was:

“27.       Thisis meant to be a note with a note in it {NOTE: This is the note within a note}.”

(I checked and {} are indeed my temporary citation delimiters.)

Actually, I’ve noticed that my example is not exactly what I want to do. The example above is of an endnote within an endnote, but actually what I want is an _citation_ within an endnote, e.g.

[Text]

Hence, culling reduces the susceptible population and reduces transmission by removing infected (but undiagnosed) animals, whereas vaccination essentially only achieves the former (17). 

[Citations]

  1. R. M. Anderson, R. M. May, Infectious Diseases of Humans (Oxford Univ. Press, 1991). 

…

  1. Removal by culling of an infected herd and the removal of contiguous holdings of animals have different impacts on R0 and the scale of the epidemic. The former acts directly to reduce R0, whereas the latter serves to signiÞcantly reduce the overall scale of the epidemic by stopping second-generation transmission events [hence reducing the effective reproductive number (10)].

Again, once I -Insert Note- I am no longer able to click -Insert Citation-, and if I try to use temporary citation delimiters the citation does not resolve (i.e. I am left with something like “…  effective reproductive number {Anderson, 1991}].”

I suppose a manual fix could be just to type in the number of the “inner” citation at the very end of the production process, i.e. after converting to plain text. This seems a bit clunky and prone to mistakes, though.

Message Edited by Venable on 07-07-2009 11:02 PM

4

With the Science style, you don’t have two separate sequences (one sequence of references and another sequence of endnotes). You have a single numbered sequence of notes, in which references and other notes are interfiled. I just checked some articles in the latest issue of “Science”, and this is still the case.

So you use EndNote for everything, both the references (which you insert in the normal way) and the other notes (which you insert using the Insert Note function). EndNote will create a single sequence in which these are interfiled.

You don’t use Word’s Footnote/Endnote function at all.

5

Right.

What I mean is that I would like to create an endnote (in EndNote) and within that endnote create a citation (also using EndNote).

So the final output would look something like this:

[Text of paper]

Here is the general point I am making (6).

[Citation / endnote section]

  1. Here is a detail that is important but really belongs in a footnote. Other people have done research on this detail (7).

  2. A. Einstein, Annalen der Physik 17 , 891 (1905).

Sorry to communicate this so poorly!

6

In Science, wouldn’t these two be joined together?   I would just manually cut and paste a formated reference into the Note.  I expect that this would be asking alot of the software – to recognize a field within a field? 

7

@leanne wrote:
In Science, wouldn’t these two be joined together?   I would just manually cut and paste a formated reference into the Note.  I expect that this would be asking alot of the software – to recognize a field within a field? 

 

I don’t think they are joined together – the example in my 11:00 PM post (“Hence, culling…”) is straight from an article in Science, and I have seen other examples. Also, instructions for authors documentation on the Science website requests it this way (assuming I am interpreting this correctly).

 

I actually was surprised that this would be difficult – it is super-easy in LaTeX.

 

I suppose I’ll use a manual patch for now.

 

Message Edited by Venable on 07-08-2009 03:31 AM