I have a customized bibliography template that incorporates the “Short TItle” field as part of the citation. Some of my records do not have any data entered in the “Short TItle” field. However, when the citation is displayed, the “Title” field data appears twice in the citation, once where is should be in place of “Title” and again where “Short TItle” appears. It appears that the bibliography generator is not recognizing “Short TItle” as a distinct field name when the field is blank. It sees “… Title” and assumes that the “Title” field entry goes here. How do I prevent EndNote X7 from making this substitution?
Can you attach the output style and ref type that is doing this and which style you customized it from?
I believe I may have used the Numbered style as my starting point, but it was awhile ago, so I am not sure.
Here is the customized template for the Book Section reference type :
Rev. of Reviewed Item.| Trans. Translator.| in Book Title,| Original Publication .| Editor, ed.^eds. ,| Edition ed.| Series Title,|. Short Title,| vol. Volume|. Place Published:| Publisher, (Year)|. Pages|.
A typical formatted ciation with an empty “Short Title” field shows up like this:
 S. Qian, and P. Takacs, “Nano-Accuracy Surface Figure Metrology of Precision Optics,” in Modern Metrology Concerns, L. Cocco, ed. Nano-Accuracy Surface Figure Metrology of Precision Optics, InTech, (2012).
This duplication does not occur in the “Series TItle” field, only in the “Short Title” field. Strange.
please attach the actual output style - as more setting than just the template affect these things?
it will be in your “my documents” or library folder /endnote/styles
Are they used in the bibliography or footnotes. Footnotes I assume?
The Proc SPIE.ens style file is attached. I use it mainly to make footnotes in papers.
Proc SPIE.ens (24.8 KB)
I am not a footnote expert, but the way Short title is used in most instances, is instead of the full title in certain situations. So, for example, the first time a citation is cited, one uses the full title and later, when cited again, the short title for the same article. – in footnote templates you then have the first time it is used and the the -short form.
When there is no short title, endnote includes the full title by design, because it is unusual to use both, and it there isn’t a short title, one usually does want to use the long version rather than leave it blank. The short title is a short version of the long title. I am not sure what guidelines you are following that want the short title (with is a title for the same article that is shorter than the title itself) and the long title elsewhere in the same reference. Are you trying to use it for a different purpose? – It is a very specific and complicated field which I don’t think can be repurposed.
Thanks for the detailed info about the underlying design to the styles. I set up this particular style to handle conference papers appearing in the various volumes of the “Proceedings of the SPIE”. Each SPIE conference has a name, and the papers presented at that conference appear in a volume with that name. But historically, these volumes are cited by the volume number, for instance as Proc. SPIE 2124 , in addition to the volume name. I manually added Proc. SPIE to the Short TItle field for each record so that it would show up this way for SPIE papers from SPIE conferences, but not for other conferences where this field would be blank. But the formatted citations for records with blank “Short TItle” fields show up with the full “Title” field inserted. It is rather confusing because my understanding of how citations work is evolving. I think a better way would be to create a custom reference type in the Numbered style just to handle SPIE references. Will this work? I was trying to modify the Conference Proceedings reference type to handle both normal and SPIE records, but is appears that this may not be the best way to do it.
I would suggest editing the ref type to use one of the unused custom fields for the SPIE info, and not the the short title field and I think the problem will go away?