APA MANUAL 6TH PDF
A Guide to APA 6th ed. Referencing on referred to as the APA manual], especially chapters 6 & 7. . 6ABC0EA//DBSCH_SCR__ pdf. APA Referencing (6th edition). This is the For further information, please refer to the 6th edition of The Publication Manual of the American Psychological. Association . wk/docs/worldcreation.info Flintoff and. APA Manual 6th Edition (1).pdf Printed in the United States of America Sixth Edition, First Printing Contents List of Tables and Figures xi Foreword xiii Preface .
|Language:||English, Spanish, Hindi|
|ePub File Size:||30.68 MB|
|PDF File Size:||8.85 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
examples and you can also look up the APA manual. We currently hold DCU Library APA Referencing Style Guide. 6 | Page. Quoting poems. For short quotes . APA STYLE MANUAL – 6 th. Ed. APA requires the use of in-text parenthetical citations, not footnotes. These in-text . journals/releases/devpdf. Sixth Edition, The paper needs to have one-inch margins (APA, , pp. .. For other rules concerning numbers, see pages in APA Manual.
Page Numbers and Running Head p. Include a "running head" on each page p. See the sample paper on p. Tip: Use the "header" function on your word processor to set up the page numbers and running head.
Since the running head format is different on the title page than the subsequent pages, you will need to choose "different first page" within your word processor header function.
Why Cite Your Sources? In all types of research and scholarly writing, it is important to cite your sources in order to: Help readers identify and locate the source you used. APA encourages the open sharing of data among qualified investigators. Authors are expected to comply promptly and in a spirit of cooperation with requests for data sharing from other researchers.
Before sharing data, delete any personally identifiable information or code that would make it possible to reestablish a link to an individual participant's identity. In addition to protecting the confidentiality of research partici- pants, special proprietary or other concerns of the investigator or sponsor of the research sometimes must be addressed as well.
Generally, the costs of complying with the request should be borne by the requester. To avoid misunderstanding, it is important for the researcher requesting data and the researcher providing data to come to a written agreement about the conditions under which the data are to be shared.
Such an agreement must specify the limits on how the shared data may be used e. Furthermore, the agreepierit should specify limits on the dissemination conference presentations, internal journal articles, book chapters, etc.
Data-sharing arrangements must be entered into with proper consideration of copyright restrictions, consent provided by subjects, ments of funding agencies, and rules promulgated by the employer of the holder of the data APA Ethics Code Standard 8. Thus, reports in the literature must accurately reflect the independence of separate research efforts. Both duplicate and piecemeal publication of data constitute threats to these goals. Duplicate publication is the publication of the same data or ideas in two separate sources.
Piecemeal publi- cation is the unnecessary splitting of the findings from one research effort into multi- pie articles. Duplicate publication. Misrepresentation of data as original when they have been pub- lished previously is specifically prohibited by APA Ethics Code Standard 8.
Duplicate publication distorts the knowledge base by making it appear that there is more information available than really exists. It also n- wastes scarce resources journal pages and the time and efforts of editors and review- ers. The prohibition against duplicate publication is especially critical for the cumula- id tive knowledge of the field.
Duplicate publication can give the erroneous impression that findings are more replicable than is the case or that particular conclusions are more strongly supported than is warranted by the cumulative evidence. Duplicate pub- nt lication can also lead to copyright violations; authors cannot assign the copyright for in the same material to more than one publisher. Authors must not submit to an APA journal a man- uscript describing work that has been published previously in whole or in substantial Ic part elsewhere, whether in English or in another language.
More important, authors should not submit manuscripts that have been published elsewhere in substantially rs similar form or with substantially similar content. Authors in doubt about what con- ta stitutes prior publication should consult with the editor of the journal in question. This policy does exclude from consideration the same or overlapping mate- rial that has appeared in a publication that has been offered for public sale, such as conference proceedings or a book chapter; such a publication does not meet the crite- rion of "limited circulation.
Acknowledging and citing previous work Authors sometimes want to publish what is essentially the same material in more than one venue to reach different audiences. However, such duplicate publication can rarely be justified, given the ready accessibil- ity of computerized retrieval systems for published works. If it is deemed scientifically necessary to re-present previously published material—for instance, in reports of new analyses or to frame new research that follows up on previous work from the authors' laboratory—the following conditions must be met: The amount of duplicated material must be small relative to the total length of the text.
The text must clearly acknowledge in the author note and other relevant sections of the article i. Any republished tables and figures must be clearly marked as reprinted or adapted, and the original source must be provided both in the text and in a footnote to the table or figure.
The original publication venue must be clearly and accurately cited in the reference list see also the discussion on self-plagiarism in section 1. When the original publication has multiple authors and the authorship is not iden- tical on both publications, it is important that all authors receive agreed-upon credit e.
APA 6th Edition - University of Lincoln
Piecemeal publication. Authors are obligated to present work parsimoniously and as completely as possible within the space constraints of journal publications. Data that can be meaningfully combined within a single publication should be presented to- gether to enhance effective communication. Piecemeal, or fragmented, publication of research findings can be misleading if multiple reports appear to represent independ- ent instances of data collection or analyses; distortion of the scientific literature, espe- cially in reviews or meta-analyses, may result.
Piecemeal publication of several reports of the results from a single study is therefore undesirable unless there is a clear benefit to scientific communication. It may be quite difficult to determine whether such a ben- efit exists when multiple dependent variables that were observed in the same sample and at the same time are reported in separate manuscripts.
Authors who wish to divide the report of a study into more than one article should inform the editor and provide such information as the editor requests.
Whether the publication of two or more reports based on the same or on closely related research constitutes fragmented publi- cation is a matter of editorial judgment.
Reanalysis of published data. There may be times, especially in instances of large- scale, longitudinal, or multidisciplinary projects, when it is both necessary and appro- priate to publish multiple reports. Multidisciplinary projects often address diverse top- ics, and publishing in a single journal may be inappropriate. Repeated publication from a longitudinal study is often appropriate because the data at different ages make unique scientific contributions.
Further, useful knowledge should be made available to others as soon as possible, which is precluded if publication is withheld until all the studies are completed. For example, in the early years of a longitudinal study, one might cite all previous publications from it. For a well-known or long-term longitudinal study, one iat might cite the original publication, a more recent summary, and earlier articles that es.
Authors may refer the reader to an earli- er publication for this detailed information. It is important, however, to provide suffi- rs cient information so that the reader can evaluate the current report.
It is also important to make clear the degree of sample overlap in multiple reports from large studies. Again, authors should inform and consult with the editor prior to the submission of a manuscript of this type.
Whether the publication of two or more reports based on the same ed or closely related research constitutes duplicate publication is a matter of editorial judgment, as is the determination of whether the manuscript meets other publication d, criteria. Any prior publication should be noted see previous section on acknowledg- he ing and citing previous work and referenced in the manuscript, and authors must inform the journal editor of the existence of any similar manuscripts that have already ce been published or accepted for publication or that may be submitted for concurrent consideration to the same journal or elsewhere.
The editor can then make an informed judgment as to whether the submitted manuscript includes sufficient new information lit to warrant consideration. If, during the review or production process, a manuscript is discovered to be in violation of duplicate publication policies and authors have failed to inform the editor of the possible violation, then the manuscript can be rejected with- as out further consideration. If such a violation is discovered after publication in an APA tat journal, appropriate action such as retraction by the publisher or notice of duplicate publication will be taken.
Authors d- have a responsibility to reveal to the reader that portions of the new work were previ- ously published and to cite and reference the source. If copyright is owned by a pub- lisher or by another person, authors must acknowledge copyright and obtain permis- fit sion to adapt or reproduce.
Researchers do not claim the words and ideas of another as their own; they re give credit where credit is due APA Ethics Code Standard 8. Ii- Quotation marks should be used to indicate the exact words of another. Each time you paraphrase another author i. The following paragraph is an example of how one might appropriately paraphrase some of the foregoing material in this section.
As stated in the sixth edition of the Publication Manual of the American to Ps ychological Association APA, , the ethical principles of scientific publica- Eie tion are designed to ensure the integrity of scientific knowledge and to protect the intellectual property rights of others. The key element of this principle is that authors do not present the work of anoth- er as if it were their own work.
This can extend to ideas as well as written words. If authors model a study after one done by someone else, the originating author should be given credit. If the rationale for a study was suggested in the Discussion section of someone else's article, that person should be given credit.
Given the free exchange of ideas, which is very important to the health of intellectual discourse, authors may not know where an idea for a study originated. If authors do know, however, they should acknowledge the source; this includes personal communications. For additional infor- mation on quotations and paraphrasing, see sections 6. Just as researchers do not present the work of others as their own pla- giarism , they do not present their own previously published work as new scholarship self-plagiarism.
There are, however, limited circumstances e. When the duplicated words are limited in scope, this approach is permissible. When duplication of one's own words is more extensive, citation of the duplicated words should be the norm.
What constitutes the maximum acceptable length of duplicated material is difficult to define but must conform to legal notions of fair use. The general view is that the core of the new document must consti- tute an original contribution to knowledge, and only the amount of previously pub- lished material necessary to understand that contribution should be included, primarily in the discussion of theory and methodology. When feasible, all of the author's own words that are cited should be located in a single paragraph or a few paragraphs, with a citation at the end of each.
Opening such paragraphs with a phrase like "as I have pre- viously discussed" will also alert readers to the status of the upcoming material. Protecting the Rights and Welfare of Research Participants 1. Standards 8. Authors, regardless of field, are required to certify that they have followed these standards as a precondition of publishing their articles in APA journals see http: Authors are also encouraged to include such certifications in the description of participants in the text of the manuscript.
Failure to fol- low these standards can be grounds for rejecting a manuscript for publication or for retraction of a published article. Protecting confidentiality. Confidentiality in case stud- ies is generally handled by one of two means. One option is to prepare the descriptive case material, present it to the subject of the case report, and obtain written consent for its publication from the subject.
In doing so, however, one must be careful not to exploit persons over whom one has supervisory, evaluative, or other authority such as clients, ild patients, supervisees, employees, or organizational clients see APA Ethics Code of Standard 3. The other option is to disguise some aspects of of the case material so that neither the subject nor third parties e.
Four main strategies have emerged for achieving this: Such disguising of cases is a delicate issue because it is essential not to change vari- ables that would lead the reader to draw false conclusions related to the phenomena [a- being described Tuckett, For example, altering the subject's gender in a case illus- tip trating a promising therapy for rape trauma might compromise its educative value if the ils client—patient's gender played a significant role in the treatment.
Subject details should be Lte omitted only if they are not essential to the phenomenon described. Subject privacy, how- If- ever, should never be sacrificed for clinical or scientific accuracy. Cases that cannot ade- quately disguise identifiable subject information should not be submitted for publication. An author's in economic and commercial interests in products or services used or discussed in a paper may color such objectivity.
Whether an interest is significant will depend on individual circumstances and can- not be defined by a dollar amount. Holdings in a company through a mutual fund are not ordinarily sufficient to warrant disclosure, whereas salaries, research grants, con- sulting fees, and personal stock holdings would be.
Participation on a board of directors or any other relationship with an entity or person that is in some way part of the paper should also be carefully considered for possible disclosure. In addition to disclosure of possible sources of positive bias, authors should also carefully consider disclosure when circumstances could suggest bias against a product, service, facility, or person. For example, having a copyright or royalty interest in a competing psychological test or assessment protocol might be seen as a possible source of negative bias against another test instrument.
The previous examples refer to possible conflicts of interest of a researcher in the con- duct of the research. It is important to recognize that reviewers of research reports also have potential conflicts of interest.
In general, one should not review a manuscript from a Colleague or collaborator, a close personal friend, or a recent student. Reviewers also have an ethical obligation to be open and fair in assessing a man- uscript without bias. If for any reason a reviewer may find this difficult, it is appropri- ate to discuss the potential conflict of interest with the action editor as soon as this sit- uation becomes apparent.
Last, reviewers have an obligation to maintain the confidentiality of a manuscript. This means, in general, that one does not discuss the manuscript with another individ- ual.
Moreover, as noted in section 1. Definition of authorship. Individuals should only take authorship credit for work they have actually performed or to which they have substantially contributed APA Ethics Code Standard 8. Authorship encompasses, therefore, not only those who do the actual writing but also those who have made substantial scientific con- tributions to a study.
Substantial professional contributions may include formulating the problem or hypothesis, structuring the experimental design, organizing and conducting the statistical analysis, interpreting the results, or writing a major portion of the paper. Those who so contribute are listed in the byline. Lesser contributions, which do not con- stitute authorship, may be acknowledged in a note see section 2. These contributions may include such supportive functions as designing or building the apparatus, suggesting or advising about the statistical analysis, collecting or entering the data, modifying or structuring a computer program, and recruiting participants or obtaining animals.
Conducting routine observations or diagnoses for use in studies does not constitute authorship. Combinations of these and other tasks, however, may justify authorship. Determining authorship.
As early as practicable in a research project, the collaborators should decide on which tasks are necessary for the project's completion, how the work F will be divided, which tasks or combination of tasks merits authorship credit, and on what level credit should be given first author, second author, etc. Collaborators may need to reassess authorship credit and order if changes in relative contribution are made in the course of the project and its publication.
This is especially true in faculty— student collaborations, when students may need more intensive supervision than origi- nally anticipated, when additional analyses are required beyond the scope of a student's current level of training Fisher, , or when the level of the contribution of the stu- dent exceeds that originally anticipated. When a paper is accepted by an editor, each person listed in the byline must verify in writing that he or she agrees to serve as an author and accepts the responsibilities of authorship see the section on author responsibilities at the beginning of Chapter 8.
Authors are responsible for determining authorship and for spec- ifying the order in which two or more authors' names appear in the byline. The gen- eral rule is that the name of the principal contributor should appear first, with subse- in- quent names in order of decreasing contribution, but this convention can vary froth ri- field to field.
If authors played equal roles in the research and publication of their ;it- study, they may wish to note this in the author note see section 2. Principal authorship and the order of authorship credit should accurately reflect id- the relative contributions of persons involved APA Ethics Code Standard 8. Relative status i. Because doctoral work is expect- ed to represent an independent and original contribution devised by students, except under rare circumstances, students should be listed as the principal author of any mul- tiauthored papers substantially based on their dissertation APA Ethics Code Standard 8.
Unusual exceptions to doctoral student first authorship might occur when the doctoral dissertation is published as part of a collection of stud- ies involving other researchers Fisher, Whether students merit principal author- ship on master's-level or other predoctoral research will depend on their specific con- tributions to the research.
When master's-level students make the primary contributions to a study, they should be listed as the first author. When students are Ley just beginning to acquire skills necessary to make a primary scientific contribution, ics they may conduct master's theses that involve the opportunity to learn these skills ily through collaboration on a faculty-originated project.
In such cases, authorship should n- be determined by the relative contributions of student and faculty member to the proj- he ect Fisher, During the review process, the manuscript is a confidential and or privileged document. Editors and reviewers may not, without authors' explicit permis- Is. If reviewers for APA journals wish to consult with a colleague about some aspect of the manuscript, the reviewer must rs request permission from the editor prior to approaching the colleague.
Publishers have rk different policies on this, and reviewers should consult with the editor about this mat- ter. In addition, editors and reviewers may not use the material from an unpublished ay manuscript to advance their own or others' work without the author's consent. Under the Copyright Act of title 17 of the United States Code , an unpublished work is copyrighted from the moment it is fixed in tangible form—for example, typed on a page.
Copyright protection is "an incident of the process of of authorship" U. Copyright Office, , p. Until authors formally transfer copy- right see section 8. To ensure copyright protection, include the copyright notice on all published works e. The notice need not appear on unpublished works; nonetheless, it is recommended that a copy- right notice be included on all works, whether published or not.
Registration of copyright provides a public record and is usually a prerequisite for any legal action. Authors submitting a manuscript to an APA journal are required to submit a form stating their compliance with ethical standards for publication as well as a form disclosing any conflicts of interest see Chapter 8, Figures 8. We encourage authors to consult these forms before beginning their research project and at regular intervals throughout the entire research process.
Whether or not the work will be submitted to an APA journal, issues related to institutional approval, informed consent, deception in research, and participant protections should be carefully considered while the research is in the planning stages and may be the basis of questions for editors or reviewers see Chapter 8. In particular, we urge researchers to review the following checklist. Ethical Compliance Checklist D Have you obtained permission for use of unpublished instruments, proce- dures, or data that other researchers might consider theirs proprietary?
S Have you properly cited other published work presented in portions of your manuscript? El Are you prepared to answer questions about institutional review of your study or studies? S Are you prepared to answer editorial questions about the informed consent and debriefing procedures you used? S If your study involved animal subjects, are you prepared to answer editorial questions about humane care and use of animals in research?
U Have all authors reviewed the manuscript and agreed on responsibility for its content? S Have you adequately protected the confidentiality of research participants, clients—patients, organizations, third parties, or others who were the source of information presented in this manuscript? S Have all authors agreed to the order of authorship?
S Have you obtained permission for use of any copyrighted material you have included? For each manuscript element, we detail current expectations for the Jn content. In each section, the following kinds of information are included: These reporting stan- dards relate to material recommended to appear in the abstract, the introduction of the research problem, the method section, the results, and the discussion of the results.
Also presented are three specific modules relating to studies with manipulated condi- tions or interventions. The chapter ends with sample papers that illustrate the function and format of the sections described.
Journal Article Reporting Standards Reporting standards provide a degree of comprehensiveness in the information that is routinely included in reports of empirical investigations. The motivation for the devel- opment of reporting standards has come from within the disciplines of the behavioral, social, educational, and medical sciences.
Uniform reporting standards make it easier to generalize across fields, to more fully understand the implications of individual stud- ies, and to allow techniques of meta-analysis to proceed more efficiently. Also, decision makers in policy and practice have emphasized the importance of understanding how research was conducted and what was found.
A set of comprehensive reporting stan- dards facilitates this understanding. Reporting standards are emergent and have not yet been developed for all types of studies. I In the next section, we describe a set of reporting standards relating to the mate- rial recommended to appear in a the abstract; b the introduction of the research problem; c subsections of the method section describing the characteristics of the par- ticipants; sampling procedures; sample size, power, and precision; measures and covari- ates; and the general descriptor of the research design; d the statistical results; and e the discussion of results.
These standards relate to all types of research designs. Then we present three specific modules relating to studies with manipulated conditions or interventions. You can use or a journal editor may ask you to use these modules in addition to the general template if they are relevant to the research at hand.
One mod- ule contains standards for describing the experimental manipulation or intervention itself, and the other two modules describe features of designs with experimental i. We also provide a flow chart to help you describe how subjects moved through the experimental or quasi-experimental study.
In the same spirit, we include standards for reports of meta-analyses. Before you begin to write a manuscript, con- sult the particular journal to which you are considering submitting and see whether there are journal-specific guidelines regarding your research design. We relied heavily on previous efforts to construct reporting standards in develop- ing the standards presented here. Four earlier efforts contributed to the meta-analysis reporting standards.
General Guidelines for APA Citation Style
A complete description of how the standards were developed can be found in "Reporting Standards for Research in Psychology: Why Do We Need Them? What Might They Be? Four sets of guidelines, which can be found in the Appendix, have been created to help you decide which elements are relevant to your study.
These guidelines are from the American Psychologist article see previous paragraph and include entries beyond those discussed in this chapter. The additional modules for designs involving experimental manipu- lations and interventions can be found in Table 2 of the Appendix, Module A: Not everything in these guidelines will be relevant to every article you prepare.
Also, as descriptions of research expand, so does the space needed to report them.: Most scholarly publishers, ma! So, some of the material in the appendices may not appear in the published arti- ate- cle itself but rather in an online supplemental archive. We discuss supplemental mate- rch na1 more fully in section 2. It should be a concise statement of the main topic and should identify the van- I e ables or theoretical issues under investigation and the relationship between them.
Although its principal d function is to inform readers about the study, a title is also used as a statement of arti- cle content for abstracting and reference purposes in databases such as APA's PsycINFO. Titles are commonly indexed and compiled in numerous reference works. Therefore, avoid words that serve no useful purpose; they increase length and can mislead indexers. For example, the words method and results do not normally appear in a title, nor should mg - such terms as A Study of or An Experimental Investigation of.
Occasionally a term such see as a research synthesis or a meta-analysis or fMRI study of conveys important informa- it tion for the potential reader and is included in the title. Avoid using abbreviations in a title; spelling out all terms helps ensure accurate, complete indexing of the article. Linu The title should be typed in uppercase and lowercase letters, centered between the left and right margins, and positioned in the upper half of the page.
The preferred form of an author's name is first name, middle of initial s , and last name; this form reduces the likelihood of mistaken identity. To pu- assist researchers as well as librarians, use the same form for publication throughout A: Determining whether Juanita A. Smith is the same person as J. Smith, J. Smith can be difficult, particularly when citations span several years and to institutional affiliations change.
Omit all titles e. The affiliation identifies the location where the author or authors were when the research was conducted, which is usually an institution. Include a dual affiliation only if two institutions contributed substantial support to the study.
Include no more than two affiliations per author. When an author has no institutional affiliation, list the city and state of residence below the author's name. Foster II and Roy R. Davis Jr. The names of the authors should appear in the order of their contributions, cen- tered between the side margins. For names with suffixes e. The institutional affiliation should be centered under the author's name, on the next line. John 0. Students should note that an author note is usually not a requirement for theses and dissertations.
Notes should be arranged as follows. First paragraph: Complete departmental affiliation. Identify departmental affiliations at the time of the study for all authors. Format as follows: If an author is not affiliated with an institution, provide the city and state provide city and country for authors whose affil- iations are outside of the United States, and include province for authors in Canada or Australia. No degrees should be given, and state names should be spelled out.
Second paragraph: Changes of affiliation if any. Identify any changes in author affili- ation subsequent to the time of the study.
Use the following wording: The affiliation should include the department and institution. Identifygrants or other financial support and the source, if appropriate for your study; do not precede grant numbers by No. Next, acknowledge colleagues who assisted in conducting the study or critiquing the manu- script. Do not acknowledge the persons routinely involved in the review and accept- ance of manuscripts—peer reviewers or editors, associate editors, and consulting edi- tors of the journal in which the article is to appear.
If you would like to acknowledge a specific idea raised by a reviewer, do so in the text where the idea is discussed. In this paragraph, also explain any special agreements concerning authorship, such as if authors contributed equally to the study. End this paragraph with thanks for personal assistance, such as in manuscript preparation.
Special circumstances. If there are any special circumstances, disclose them before the acknowledgments in the third paragraph. For example, if the manuscript is based on data also used in a previously published report e.
Also, acknowledge the publication of related reports e. If any relationships may be perceived as a conflict of interest e. If your employer or granting organization requires a disclaimer stating, for example, that the research reported does not reflect the views of that organization, such a statement is included in this paragraph.
Person to contact mailing address, e-mail. Provide a complete the mailing address for correspondence. End this paragraph with an e-mail address and nal no period. This research was supported in part by grants from the National Institute on en- Aging and from the John D.
APA 6th referencing style
MacArthur Foundation. Start each paragraph of the note with an indent, and ext type separate paragraphs for the authors' names and current affiliations, changes in an affiliations, acknowledgments, and special circumstances, if any, along with the person Ill- to contact.
The author note is not numbered or cited in the text. Consult the instructions to authors or web page of the journal to which you plan to submit your articte for any journal-specific instructions. A well-prepared abstract can be the most important singte paragraph in an articte. Most peopte have their first contact with an articte by seeing just the abstract, usually in comparison with severat other abstracts, as they are doing a titerature search. Readers frequently decide on the basis of the abstract whether to read the entire arti- cle.
The abstract needs to be dense with information. By embedding key words in your abstract, you enhance the user's ability to find it.
Ensure that the abstract correctty reflects the purpose and content of the manuscript. Do not inctude information that does not appear in the body of the manuscript. If the study extends or replicates previous research, note this in the abstract and cite the author's tast name and the year of the relevant report.
Comparing an abstract with an outtine of the manuscript's headings is a usefut way to verify its accuracy. Report rather than evaluate; do not add to or comment on what is in the body of the manuscript. Write in ctear and concise tanguage. Use verbs rather than their noun equivalents and the active rather than the passive voice e. Use the present tense to describe conctusions drawn or resutts with continuing appticability; use the past tense to describe specific variables maniputat- ed or outcomes measured.
Be brief, and make each sentence maximally informative, especially the tead sentence. Begin the abstract with the most important points. Do not waste space by repeating the title. Inctude in the abstract onty the four or five most important con- cepts, findings, or imptications.
Use the specific words in your abstract that you think your audience will use in their electronic searches. An abstract for a theory-oriented paper should describe: Word limits vary from journal to journal and typically range from to words. When preparing your manuscript, begin the abstract on a new page and identify it by with the running head or abbreviated title and the page number 2. The label Abstract in- should appear in uppercase and lowercase letters, centered, at the top of the page.
Type the abstract itself as a single paragraph without paragraph indentation. The body of a manuscript opens with an introduction that pres- ents the specific problem under study and describes the research strategy. Because the introduction is clearly identified by its position in the manuscript, it does not carry a heading labeling it the introduction.
Before writing the introduction, consider the following questions: If other aspects of this study have been reported previously, how does this report differ from, and build on, the earlier report? I What are the primary and secondary hypotheses and objectives of the study, and what, if any, are the links to theory? A good introduction answers these questions in just a few pages and, by summa- rizing the relevant arguments and the past evidence, gives the reader a firm sense of what was done and why.
State why the problem deserves new research. For applied research, this might involve the need to solve a social problem or treat a psychological disorder. When research is driven by the desire to resolve controversial issues, all sides in the debate should be represented in balanced measure in the intro- duction. Avoid animosity and ad hominem arguments in presenting the controversy. Conclude the statement of the problem in the introduction with a brief but formal statement of the purpose of the research that summarizes the material preceding it.
For literature reviews as well as theoretical and methodological articles, also clearly state the reasons that the reported content is important and how the article fits into, the cumulative understanding of the field.
Describe relevant scholarship. Discuss the relevant related literature, but do not feel compelled to include an exhaustive historical account. Assume that the reader is knowledgeable about the basic problem and does not require a complete accounting of its history. A scholarly description of earlier work in the introduction provides a summary of the most recent directly related work and recognizes the priority of the work of others. Citation of and specific credit to relevant earlier works are signs of scientific and scholarly responsibility and are essential for the growth of a cumula- tive science.
In the description of relevant scholarship, also inform readers whether other aspects of this study have been reported on previously and how the current use of the evidence differs from earlier uses. At the same time, cite and reference only works pertinent to the specific issue and not those that are of only tangential or gen- eral significance.
When summarizing earlier works, avoid nonessential details; instead, emphasize pertinent findings, relevant methodological issues, and major conclusions. Refer the reader to general surveys or research syntheses of the topic if they are available. Demonstrate the logical continuity between previous and present work. Develop the problem with enough breadth and clarity to make it generally understood by as wide a professional audience as possible.
Title of Journal, volume number issue number if available. A Buddhist response to the nature of human rights. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 8. However, the OWL still includes information about databases for those users who need database information.
When referencing a print article obtained from an online database such as a database in the library , provide appropriate print citation information formatted just like a "normal" print citation would be for that type of work. By providing this information, you allow people to retrieve the print version if they do not have access to the database from which you retrieved the article.
You can also include the item number or accession number or database URL at the end, but the APA manual says that this is not required. If you are citing a database article that is available in other places, such as a journal or magazine, include the homepage's URL.
You may have to do a web search of the article's title, author, etc. For articles that are easily located, do not provide database information. If the article is difficult to locate, then you can provide database information. Only use retrieval dates if the source could change, such as Wikis. For more about citing articles retrieved from electronic databases, see pages of the Publication Manual.
A study of enjoyment of peas. Journal of Abnormal Eating, 8 3 , However, if the full text is not available, you may use an abstract that is available through an abstracts database as a secondary source. Paterson, P. How well do young offenders with Asperger Syndrome cope in custody?
British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36 1 , Hendricks, J. A world apart? Bridging the gap between theory and applied social gerontology. Gerontologist, 50 3 , Abstract retrieved from Abstracts in Social Gerontology database. Accession No. Year, Month Day. Title of Newspaper.
Psychiatry handbook linked to drug industry. The New York Times.
Use the following format if the book you are using is only provided in a digital format or is difficult to find in print. If the work is not directly available online or must be downloadd, use "Available from," rather than "Retrieved from," and point readers to where they can find it. For books available in print form and electronic form, include the publish date in parentheses after the author's name.
For references to e-book editions, be sure to include the type and version of e-book you are referencing e. If DOIs are available, provide them at the end of the reference.
De Huff, E. Familiar birdsongs of the Northwest. Dracula [Kindle DX version]. Retrieved from site. In Title of book or larger document chapter or section number. Change in the Nineties. Bough and G. DuBois Eds. Retrieved from GoldStar database.
NOTE: Use a chapter or section identifier and provide a URL that links directly to the chapter section, not the home page of the website.It is both conventional and expedient to divide the Method sec- t- tion into labeled subsections.
Smith is the same person as J. Write in ctear and concise tanguage. Moeivoiion ond Eanonon 27, — No signirtcant RT differences based on ': Procedure Al the alan of each session, listeners took part in a wamn-up block.
If reviewers for APA journals wish to consult with a colleague about some aspect of the manuscript, the reviewer must rs request permission from the editor prior to approaching the colleague. Avoid animosity and ad hominem arguments in presenting the controversy. For analyses based on very small samples including single-case investigations , consider providing the complete set of raw data in a table or figure.