Hallo all,

Now, let me start by saying that I'm used to referencing, but having read some others' PhDs lately, I'm beginning to think I might 'over-cite'. For example, I have it so drilled into me from the British academic tradition that anytime I say something, even if it is widely known (e.g. Freud is the father of psychoanalysis/Seneca was a stoic) then I feel the need to cite.

What approach do you take to citing your sources?

It's also interesting that most of the books I cite (these come mostly in the introductory sections of the lit review...as I get into methodology/discussion it tends to be journal articles) don't themselves reference their assertions. So, for example, if a well known author writes 'Freud became increasingly unpopular in the field', there is no citation for this.

Cheers!

Euan

======= Date Modified 11 Jan 2011 18:14:03 =======
Hi Euan

I know what you mean and worry myself that I over-cite at times. I think it is because I have done so much undergrad teaching where the students are definitley not guilty of this. Still I think under-citing is a far greater crime than over-citing. I have used journal articles and as I cite them I am often aware that the author themselves has not cited anybody. Have a look at Donovan, Stephen, K. (2004) I've got a little list. Area, 36, (3), 327-328 [hope I referenced that correctly!!]. It's only two pages but well worth a read.
Happy Christmas / Happy Referencing

A

Hello

I have the same problem as you Euan...I have just finished my MSc and one of the comments during my Viva was over citing and including numerous references for the same thing (I have issues with which to include and exclude when the same thing has been said by different individuals...generally this is in the intro as well). Thank you for your replies...and hope we get more cos it will certainly help me too :)

you can get round this a bit by putting your general assertion- for example 'many authors consider that under five education is essential [boyle,2003; Matthews, 2005; black,2010] whilst a few suggest this is unnecessary [peston,1998; gould,2000; mills,1995] and so on, this shows you know there is a lot of stuff out there, but you don't have to put quotes in. The lack of citing is annoying, some of the material I am using is quite old and often all you get is Mr so and so said xyz, no quote and no reference :-(