Salute to Author Identity in Academic Writing and Research

 

It has been well experienced that academic writers can rarely be “self-dependent” (in the sense of being capable of cultivating thought without depending on some sort of external information) while establishing some thesis in any field of inquiry. Instead, ideas or insights are generated and developed by making reference to the works (including research finding, theoretical proposition, or any sort of written description, etc.) of previous authors that are explained and discussed with new insights in the subsequent writings. Accordingly, one can summarize the points stated by the previous authors and carry out critical analysis, synthesize the earlier propositions, identify the lacking/gaps therein, and then refine the previously established proposition/s by making additional insights. Or, one can even come out with a different perspective to look into the phenomena so that new propositions are established.

 

While doing so, acknowledging the previously done works and the respective authors who had contributed therein is one of the common minimum academic cultures that everybody should maintain in doing research as well as writing academic papers. Accordingly, this tradition is prevailing more or less everywhere in the world – for academic as well as professional practices that take place in universities and publication houses.

 

However, some differences are found in the style of reference citation in the written text and in the way of writing the authors’ names in reference list (that is usually placed at the end of the text). In this article, I am particularly raising the issue of crisis in author identity prevailing in contemporary academic writings as a consequence of adopting some particular ‘style’ of listing the works in the ‘reference’ section of research articles, books and dissertations.

 

 

 

If we see the reference list appended to any academic article, book or research paper, we can find 5 most important things in an entry (if the entry is a non-periodical book/booklet entirely written by the same writer/s, instead of being a compilation of several articles contributed by different authors) – which include: author, publication date (year), work title, place of publication, and the publisher. In universities and academic institutions, students and research scholars are instructed to write research papers and make reference lists based on some format. In this connection, I consulted 4 different style manuals. Let us see how they have suggested the writers of research papers regarding the entry of the reference materials used in the course of writing.

 

1) Chicago Manual (Turabian and others, 2007): Following this manual, an entry is recorded in this way: (i) author's last name, (ii) author's first name, (iii) date of publication, (iv) title of book: subtitle of book if any (in italic), (v) place of publication, and (vi) publisher's name. (p. 187)

 

2) As such, this manual has given the following example of an entry in the reference list:

 

Diamond, Jared. 1997. Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

 

3) APA style (American Psychological Association, 2006): If a reference material is a non-periodical, this style instructs to record the entry in this way: “Author, A.A. (1994). Title of work. Location: Publisher” (p. 223). Here, ‘A.A.’ suggests that the author’s initial and middle name/s should be abbreviated whereby only the beginning letter of the word bearing the name is recorded (though the surname is written fully). If we enter the reference material shown above as per this format, for instance, the entry appears as:

 

Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

 

4) Little, Brown Guide (Meyer, 1985): In page 182-83, this manual clearly instructs that any reference to a book contains: (i) name(s) of author(s) in inverted order with only the initial letters of first and middle names; (ii) date of publication in parentheses followed by a period; (iii) title of the book followed by a period, and (iv) publication information that includes: place followed by colon; and publisher followed by a period. As done above, we can make the entry as per these instructions in the following way:

 

Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

 

5) MLA Handbook (Gibaldi, 2003): This handbook states that each entry should have three main divisions: Author, book title, and publication information. Here, ‘publication information’ includes the place of publication, publisher, and date (year) of publication. It instructs the writers to record the entries in this way: “Reverse the author’s name…, adding a comma after the last name. Put a period after the complete name. …Give the author’s name as it appears on the title page (my emphasis). Never abbreviate a name given in full. …But use initials if the title page does.” (p. 148). Thus, the entry appears to be like this:

 

Diamond, Jared. Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1997.

 

Amidst the similarities and differences in the instructions found across these style manuals, one of the noteworthy points is that two of them (‘Little Brown Guide’ and ‘APA’) have deliberately ‘abbreviated’ the author’s initial (and middle) name, while the other two have not. The academic implications of this difference can be understood after a discussion presented in the sub-heading that follows.

 

 

When someone writes and publishes any material with his/her name, we need to understand that the very name that appears in the paper is his/her identity. Needless to say, the author has the willingness to be identified publicly with the name as appeared in the print; and it is a matter of honesty on the part of the subsequent writer/s to regard the previous authors by their respective names and surnames without any sort of intention to misinform the readers and without causing injustice against the author to the extent of losing his/her identity.

 

In this connection, I would like to draw the attention of the respected audience towards a question that should be considered a genuine one in the academic world, which is: How can the authors’ identity be respected while recording their works in the subsequent academic writings (after the original source is consulted for reference purpose)? We must answer this question properly before deciding the style of making a list of works cited in the text, because some of the formats that are in widespread use in the ‘academic market’ have not been able to do justice in favour of authors as regards their identity.

 

We can say that there should not be a problem in following any style while making the reference list if the style tells us to record the essential information in the entry including author, year of publication, work title, place of publication and publisher. Despite this, it would be relevant to raise serious reservations regarding the ‘style’ which deliberately reduces (and thus disregards or even undermines) the identity of previous authors by ‘abbreviating’ any part of their names (first name, middle name or surname) – which is an unwanted action for the original authors, and even objectionable from the point of view of their identity (whether the authors are aware enough to make objection about it or not).

 

In the past, when I prepared academic articles, my reference list had duly honoured the authors whose works were cited in the text, by entering the words bearing their identity as appeared in the respective sources (i.e. full names and surnames if the author mentioned so, and ‘abbreviated’ names only if the source itself contained the author’s identity like that). After the articles were submitted for publication in different forums (journals in particular), many of them have been published without reducing the previous authors’ identity. But, in some of them, the editorial team has taken the ‘action’ of identity reduction by abbreviating the initial and middle names – in the name of following the APA format and maintaining uniformity in the style of all writers in the journal.

 

A reference entry of this kind, in addition to doing injustice against the identity of authors discussed above, has also caused confusion among the mass of readers in properly recognizing the author. For instance, when someone quotes a sentence or phrase from an article written by Ram Avtar Yadav and writes ‘Yadav, R.A.’ in the reference entry, there is no point to ensure that the readers will, without confusion, understand that ‘R.A.’ stands for ‘Ram Avtar’! Instead, ‘R.A.’ can be understood by readers as any name beginning with R and A in the case of the first name and middle name respectively (e.g. Raj Ashish, Ram Anish, Raj Avatar, and so on). Such a style, in this way, has not only hurt the authors’ identity but also misguided the readers – whether intentionally or unintentionally.

 

Interestingly, although such a style (which is in widespread use) does not allow the authors’ full recognition in the reference list; it has clearly instructed the writers to mention the complete name of the publisher. The attempt of giving full recognition to the publisher can be well appreciated, but there is no point in disallowing authors’ full recognition. And, there can be no reason why authors’ identity should always be hidden on one hand and the curious readers should be left in confusion on the other!

 

 

The essence underlying the discussion so far is that we must have author acknowledging and reader friendly attitude; otherwise we cannot create an encouraging environment for academic and professional prosperity, growth and development. In absence of the willingness to make correction in style (with the aim of preserving author identity), the culture of intellectual exploitation can sustain forever under the banner of academic works such as publication and research. The academia throughout the globe needs to be aware of such a practice, which is not simply a matter of style but essentially a sort of intellectual offence. Steps need to be taken towards stopping such wrong practices so that the environment of academic honour can prosper towards right direction. With this consideration, it would be advisable that the style manuals instructing the writers not to record the full identity of authors need to be revised with the genuine intention of giving respect to the authors; and book/article/research papers should be written accordingly. Sincere salute to author identity!

 

 

American Psychological Association (2006). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Fifth Edition. Washington DC: Author.

 

Gibaldi, Joseph. (2003). MLA Handbook for Writing of Research Papers. Sixth Editon. New Delhi: Affiliated East-West Press Pvt. Ltd.

 

Meyer, Michael. (1985). The Little, Brown Guide to Writing Research Papers. Second Edition. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company.

 

Turabian, Kate L. (Revised by Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, and University of Chicago Press Editorial Staff) (2007). A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations: Chicago Style for Students and Researchers. 7th edition. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

---------------------------------------------------

 

 

Associate Professor (English Education) CERID, Tribhuvan University

 

He can be reached at: binodluitel71@gmail.com