Lists, Part 4: Numbered Lists

by Timothy McAdoo

This is the fourth in a six-part series. Today we’ll look at numbered lists.

Numbered Lists

Numbered lists (as noted on p. 64 of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association) can be used to denote items in a series, such as conclusions or procedural steps. By virtue of their formatting, numbered lists stand out from the regular text and are more likely to catch a reader’s attention. So, be sure to use the numbered list format only when the list format will add clarity to the text.

Numbered lists can be useful to show the relationship between items: a chronology of events, each item’s relative importance, and so on.

The items can be single sentences or full paragraphs. In either case, the first words of the sentences are capitalized and appropriate end punctuation should be included.

Each task increased in difficulty. 1. The instructor read the rules, which began on page 2 of the booklet.     The wording of these rules differed significantly for each group (see     Appendix A). 2. The instructor asked if there were any questions. 3. After any questions had been answered, the instructor started     the timer and told the participants to begin.

If the items on the list are not complex and the list itself does not warrant special attention, consider running the items into regular text. See Parts 2 and 3 of this series for more detail on the use of serial commas, semicolons, and lowercase letters.

More to Come

In Part 5 of this series, I’ll cover a list format new to APA Style with the 6th edition: bulleted lists!

Lists, Part 1  |  Lists, Part 2  |  Lists, Part 3

Lists, Part 4  |  Lists, Part 5  |  Lists, Part 6

Lists, Part 3: Lowercase Letters

by Timothy McAdoo

In Part 2, I discussed how to create a simple list with serial commas and when to use semicolons in a list of items with internal commas. Today, I show how lowercase letters may be used as well.

Lowercase Letters

As the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association states on page 64 (3.04 Seriation), elements in a series may be identified by the use of lowercase letters. Lowercase letters are also useful when you need to clarify a complex list for which the individual elements might otherwise be difficult for a reader to discern.

Each child was seated at a separate station and given one of the following: (a) an elephant, which all children could see but not touch in Experiment 1; (b) a kangaroo, which half of the children could see but not touch and half of the children could both see and touch in Experiment 1; or (c) both the elephant and the kangaroo.

Note that the rule for serial commas or semicolons is still applicable. The lowercase letters simply add an additional visual cue for the reader.

More to Come
In the next two posts of this series, I’ll cover numbered lists and bulleted lists.

Lists, Part 1  |  Lists, Part 2  |  Lists, Part 3

Lists, Part 4  |  Lists, Part 5  |  Lists, Part 6

Lists, Part 2: Commas and Semicolons

by Timothy McAdoo

This is the second in a six-part series about lists in APA Style. Today I’ll provide examples of serial commas and semicolons.

Commas

The most basic type of list appears in the running text of a sentence, with each item separated by a comma. All lists in APA Style should include a serial comma—the final comma before the conjunction.

For example,

Each child was given a plush toy, a building block, and a rubber ball.

Semicolons

This gets more complex when an item or multiple items in your list already have commas. In these cases, separate the items with semicolons:

Each child was seated at a separate station and given the following plush toy or toys: an elephant, which all children saw in the previous experiment; a kangaroo, which only half of the children saw in the previous experiment; or both the elephant and the kangaroo.

In the next example the same principle is applied to a series that includes statistics. Proper and consistent use of commas and semicolons clarifies the grouping of each set of statistics:

The results of Experiment 1 showed a similarity across groups: Group A, t(177) = 3.01, p < .001; Group B, t(173) = 2.31, p < .001; and Group C, t(155) = 3.11, p < .001.

More examples of commas and semicolons within lists can be found in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association on pages 63–65 (3.04 Seriation), on page 88 (4.03 Comma), and on pages 89–90 (4.04 Semicolon).

More to Come

In Part 3, we’ll look at how to use lowercase letters to identify elements of a list in APA Style.

Lists, Part 1  |  Lists, Part 2  |  Lists, Part 3

Lists, Part 4  |  Lists, Part 5  |  Lists, Part 6

Lists, Part 1: Parallelism

by Timothy McAdoo

When I feel overwhelmed with tasks, I often make a list (or two or three).

Because making lists helps me organize my thoughts, I also tend to begin a rough draft of a writing assignment as a series of ideas or bullet points. In most cases, I will expand and expound on these ideas, turning them into complete paragraphs. But, sometimes a list helps clarify an idea as well. As the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association says, a list “helps the reader understand the organization of key points.”

In the first five parts of this six-part series about lists in APA Style, I will cover three aspects of list style and punctuation:

• parallelism,
• serial commas, and
• semicolons.

And, I’ll detail three types of lists:

• lettered,
• numbered, and
• bulleted.

Finally, in Part 6 I’ll summarize and post a table showing the typical uses for each type of list.

Parallelism

For a general guideline about creating lists, the Manual states that “all items should be syntactically and conceptually parallel” (p. 63). This may seem obvious, but it’s easy to use wording that’s not precisely parallel when first getting your ideas onto paper. On the second draft, assess the structure of your lists carefully.

In this example, I’ve underlined the elements that should be parallel in syntax:

Participants were told to study each picture, to turn the page when the bell rang, and that they should ask about anything unclear in the instructions.

That sentence conveys the meaning, but the lack of parallelism weakens its impact. Consider this alternative:

Participants were told to study each picture carefully, to turn the page when the bell sounded, and to ask about anything they found unclear in the instructions.

And, creating parallelism is not just about making the sentence "sound right." A parallel sentence structure makes it easier for a reader to compare like items and to follow sequences of action, much like a well-structured table makes it easier for a reader to scan and compare entries across rows.

In the following, the writer may think he or she is avoiding redundancy by omitting two instances of “Practice Group”:

Children in Practice Group A and in Groups B and C received no visual stimuli, whereas those in Practice Group D were shown an image of a lion.

But, in technical writing, this type of inconsistency can cause confusion. Was there a substantial difference between a “practice group” and a “group”? Probably not, but it might give your reader pause, especially if both terms are used throughout your paper.

There are many ways you might rewrite this sentence with a parallel structure. Here’s one example:

The researchers provided no visual stimuli to children in Practice Groups A, B, and C, whereas researchers projected an image of a lion for children in Practice Group D.

More examples of parallel structure can be found on pages 84–86 of the Manual.

More to Come

In Part 2, I’ll discuss APA Style guidelines for using commas and semicolons in lists.

Lists, Part 1  |  Lists, Part 2  |  Lists, Part 3

Lists, Part 4  |  Lists, Part 5  |  Lists, Part 6

Books That Provoke Our Thanks

   
by Jeff Hume-Pratuch

Writers in psychology and the social and behavioral sciences reach for the APA Publication Manual first when they have style and usage questions. But inevitably, some topics are outside its scope, while others are covered in less detail than one might like.

At APA, there are a few resource books we turn to in gratitude on a daily basis. You’ll find them on the desk of almost every editor here, and they just might have the answers you’re looking for.

Grammar, Usage, and Style

The Publication Manual contains valuable basic information on writing clearly and correctly but by no means covers all the bases. When I’ve been wrestling with a thorny sentence for the last half hour and it still looks wrong, I reach for Words Into Type.  If you’re looking for guidance on coordinate conjunctions or collective nouns, this is the place.

Some issues may arise infrequently in psychology and the social sciences (e.g., “In what context should I capitalize Platonic ideas?” “Where can I find a conversion chart from Wade-Giles to Pinyin?”), but they do arise. For questions with a humanities slant, the Chicago Manual of Style can be helpful. It has extensive information on foreign language references, titles of historical persons, and other topics that are beyond APA's purview.

Finally, a lighter approach sometimes helps when you’re trying to get your head around language problems. In The Elephants of Style and Lapsing Into a Comma, Bill Walsh offers tips on contemporary usage in a humorous and thoroughly approachable way. Another classic in this vein is The Careful Writer, by Theodore M. Bernstein.

Spelling and Word Division

For everyday spelling issues, APA uses Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. But when you need to know whether it’s “Alzheimer syndrome” or “Alzheimer’s disease,” we (naturally) recommend the APA Dictionary of Psychology: a thousand pages of terminology specific to the psychological sciences.

Legal References

Appendix 7.1 of the Publication Manual gives a good introduction to the use of legal materials in APA style. For most authors, this is all you’ll ever need. But researchers in some fields, such as forensic psychology, may need a more comprehensive guide. In that case, go straight to the source: The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation. (Then head over to the nearest law school librarian for help, because legal citation is an art unto itself.)

What reference works are you grateful for?

Use of First Person in APA Style

by Timothy McAdoo

I am often asked why APA Style prohibits the use of I or we. I love this question, because the answer is always a pleasant surprise: I or we is perfectly acceptable in APA Style! In fact, the Publication Manual actually recommends using first person, when appropriate, to avoid ambiguity.

 

What types of ambiguity result when an author goes to great lengths to avoid using I or we? On pages 69–70, the Manual gives three possibilities:

1. Authors sometimes use the third person simply because it sounds more objective. Authors will often use the authors as a stand-in for I or we, but using this phrase can lead to confusion. Consider this sentence:
   
   

   As Smith and Jones (1999) and Drew (2007) noted, there is no correlation between television viewing time and calorie intake. The authors replicated this finding with three experiments.

   
   Does “the authors” refer to both Smith and Jones (1999) and Drew (2007)? Or does it refer to the authors of the current paper? You would likely guess it’s the latter, but the meaning would be more clear with we:
   
   

   As Smith and Jones (1999) and Drew (2007) noted, there is no correlation between television viewing time and calorie intake. We replicated this finding with three experiments.

2. Attempts to avoid first person can also lead to anthropomorphism. As the Manual notes (p. 69), an experiment cannot “attempt to demonstrate,” but I or we can.
   
   
3. Finally, the use of the editorial we can sometimes be confusing. For example, “we categorize anxiety disorders …” may leave the reader wondering whether we refers to the authors of the current paper, to the research community, or to some other group. But this doesn't mean we must be completely avoided. As the Manual states (p. 70), “we is an appropriate and useful referent.” You could simply rewrite this sentence, “As psychologists, we categorize anxiety disorders …”

It’s not always right, or always wrong, to use the first person. We all have different writing styles, and the use of first person may come more naturally to some than to others. The most important thing to consider, whether using APA Style or another style, is the clarity and accuracy of each sentence in your text. To quote the Manual one more time, “Make certain that every word means exactly what you intend it to mean” (p. 68).

Just one caveat: As always, if you are writing a paper, thesis, or dissertation, your institution may have its own guidelines for the use of first person. The acceptability of first person is sometimes a hot topic, and guidelines vary from one institution to another. Dissertation committees sometimes advise students to follow APA Style with a list of school-specific exceptions, and the acceptability of first person may be one of these. Likewise, if you are submitting a manuscript for publication, you should always check the publisher’s guidelines.

Collective Nouns: Here Yesterday, Gone Tomorrow?

By Chuck

  

“Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
“To the curious incident of the dog in the nighttime.”
“The dog did nothing in the nighttime.”
“That was the curious incident,” remarked Sherlock Holmes.
                                —Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, “Silver Blaze”

If you were of a mind to compare, chapter by chapter and line by line, the new sixth edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association against the fifth edition that it replaces, you would notice not only a number of additions in the sixth but also some deletions from what had been in the fifth.

For instance, here is what the fifth edition had to say regarding collective nouns:

Collective nouns (e.g., series, set, faculty, or pair) can refer either to several individuals or to a single unit. If the action of the verb is on the group as a whole, treat the noun as a singular noun. If the action of the verb is on members of the group as individuals, treat the noun as a plural noun. The context (i.e., your emphasis) determines whether the action is on the group or on individuals. (5th ed., 2001, p. 45)

Following this were several examples, for instance, “The number of people in the state is growing”—“A number of people were watching” and “The couple is surrounded”—“The couple are separated” (5th ed., 2001, p. 45).

Next, here is what the sixth edition has to say about collective nouns:

                                                        *

That’s right: nothing. Nothing at all. Does the removal of these guidelines betoken an age of grammatical and syntactical chaos a-borning? Can you or I now use any verb, singular or plural, with any noun, plural or singular?

I’m afraid not. The advice given in the fifth edition was basic grammar and can easily be found elsewhere. Referring to my own bookshelf, I find the same instruction given in William W. Watt’s An American Rhetoric (1980), at page 307, and in the discussion of collective nouns in The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage (1995, p. 157). Watt concentrates on American usage, whereas Fowler leans more heavily toward British, but the overall approach bridges the Atlantic.

I imagine then that the sixth edition is intended to be more tightly focused on psychology-centric usage. To that end, it has been divested here of some universally true grammatical advice. You can learn about collective nouns from any standard handbook. The Publication Manual is evolving to feature more and more information that is uniquely pertinent to psychological science and psychological writing (albeit useful to other academic and professional disciplines). This information, which cannot be had in more generic writing guidebooks, is the meat and potatoes of the Publication Manual. Bon appétit!

To Slash/Not to Slash--That Is the Question/Quandary

“Punctuation is to make clear the thought expressed.” So say the authors of the Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual (p. 267), and they’re right, of course.  This sentiment explains some editors’ reservations about the slash (also called a solidus, slant, diagonal, virigule, forward slash, front slash, oblique stroke, or shill). In my years of editing, I’ve noticed that writers like the slash, and use it, but editors tend to, if not detest it, at least eschew it (the MLA Style Manual, for example, declares “the slash, or diagonal, is rarely necessary in formal prose”). Why? Ambiguity. Merriam-Webster’s entry on the slash illustrates perfectly the symbol’s foggy identity, defining it as “and” and “or” and “and or.”

Style, like all well-meaning advice, is sometimes a matter of urgency (e.g., “I would suggest you exit this burning house”) but more often is a matter of taste and discretion. So the sixth edition of the APA Publication Manual cautions readers not “to use a slash when a phrase would be clearer.” Or? And? “X, Y, or both?” APA Style also calls for the use of a hyphen or short dash for simple comparisons. Still, there are times when “and/or” hits the mark best, and this blogger, for one, thinks it’s a serviceable enough construction. Moreover, “and/or” is an entry in the 11th edition of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary.

Other sources echo APA’s cautions. Weighing in on “expressions of equivalence or duality,” the American Medical Association (AMA) allows a forward slash (actually, AMA likes the term virigule) to signify “and” but urges rewording around the virigule “in the likelihood of ambiguity” (p. 353). In Copyediting: A Practical Guide (1990), Judd noted that the slash is used to indicate options (e.g., when you’re going to a party/fete/gala) but reserved its principal use for mathematical copy. The Modern Language Association (MLA) likes the slash for “two terms paired as opposites/alternatives and used together as a noun.” The Chicago Manual of Style seems more tolerant of the slash, noting without commentary that it can be used as shorthand for “or” or “and.” (I’m disappointed that the venerable Words Into Type doesn’t address the slash.)

In sum, the shifty/flexible nature of the slash (and the lack of consensus on its use) reinforces the notion that effective writing and/or editing is always a matter of thinking through the small details.