Interviews you conduct should be cited with the “personal communication” in-text citation style shown on p. 179. If you need to discuss research participant data, this post will also be helpful: https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/08/lets-talk-about-research-participants.html.

Another great question! No, the Publication Manual guidelines do not recommend capitalizing any other phrases.

Good question! Yes, this guideline covers any such terms based on these words.

Good question. We do not have a guideline on decimals particular to percentages. More generally, the Publication Manual does recommend rounding "as much as possible while keeping prospective use and statistical precision in mind" (p. 113).

Because one purpose of the reference is to provide your readers with the source information, so they can retrieve the information, a source element is needed (see also https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2012/05/missing-pieces.html). But, if you search the Internet for that CD title, you will find some potential sources. If you verify that the source is the same one you have, you can use one of those URLs as your reference's source element.

Good question! For a keynote or other sessions at a conference, you can adapt the first two examples at https://on.apa.org/2uGlQ0B. That is, change "Poster session presented..." to "Keynote session presented..."

Hi, D. Thanks for writing! You are correct that an email correspondence is cited as a personal communication. And, I agree that if the interview is printed and submitted with the paper, it is akin to including an appendix in a paper. Such an appendix would be mentioned in the text of the paper ("see the Appendix" or "see Appendix A"), but it would not appear in the reference list either. One way to make such an interview retrievable might be to post the text to a personal website and then create a reference to that page. But, I think the first step should be discussing this with the teacher, who may have an opinion about how this should be handled.

Great questions! It is often difficult to tell. If it is not a blog post, you can just leave that notation out. A format description in brackets is needed only when the format is something other than an article (e.g., a blog post or lecture notes). See also the template at https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/11/how-to-cite-something-you-found-on-a-website-in-apa-style.html. And, you are correct that "tips" should be in lowercase.

Great question. In a reference without notations (the text in the square brackets), that is true. As noted in that other post, the question mark takes the place of the period that is in the same spot. However, in this reference (and others with notations following the title), the period comes after the last square bracket. That means that the question mark (at the end of the blog post's title) and the period (after the square bracket) are not in conflict. This is true when a title is followed by parentheses, too (see an example at https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2018/09/how-to-cite-a-government-report-in-apa-style.html). If one of those reports ended in a question mark, it would stay next to the title and the period would follow the end parenthesis.

Great question. You are correct to cite them as "(Lutz et al., 2008, 2015)"

Good question! The distinction is that words like "Publishers," "Co.," and "Inc." are designations about the business structure of a company or a description, whereas words like "Books" and "Press" are usually part of the publisher's name. Include only the words needed "to identify the publisher" (per page 187 in the manual).

If the book does not indicate the location, and you are unable to find it, you can include the publisher name but omit the location from the reference. See also https://on.apa.org/2q8EkXM, particularly the Source Variations section.

Good question! For any reference without a title, include a description within brackets in place of the title (see https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2012/05/missing-pieces.html). For a special issue with no title, that might look like Rotf, L. (Ed.). (2012). [Special issue about Internet cats]. The Journal of Internet Memes, 115(3).

Hi, S. N. I'm sorry I missed your question. I've replied above.

Good question. You have it right in Example A. If the interview is published, use the author given in the byline in that publication.

The sentence that includes a quote should always include the citation with page number (or paragraph number; see https://on.apa.org/2lxWpbd). You can format as shown in any of the examples shown in this post, depending on the wording of your sentences and your preference.

If mentioning an entire site, it is okay to include just the URL (see https://www.apastyle.org/learn/faqs/cite-website), whether in the main text or in a footnote or elsewhere. However, to refer to a particular page or document, a reference should be included and the text (main text or footnote next) should include a regular citation (see http://on.apa.org/cite-the-web).

Good questions! Yes, those all seem right. You can see this in the sample paper available at https://on.apa.org/2NrY8gS as well. The formatting applies to papers or manuscripts—when a manuscript is published in a journal, the figure is typically embedded into the text near the first callout and the caption is typeset to fit within the column (see, e.g., published articles from this APA journal: https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/xlm/sample.aspx).

Apologies for this very late reply! I missed this somehow, but I'll answer here in case this is still helpful and/or in case anyone else has a similar question. Generally speaking, we recommend creating the reference to exactly match what the published article showed, even if that makes references appear inconsistent. You're right that the appearance in the published article (not the database listing) should be the basis for the reference. To the question about a misspelled name, there's a chance that the article later had a correction notice posted--if that's the case, then it would be okay to use the corrected name.

Good question! If the authors are in the same reference, you don't need any brackets. The inclusion of the first name in brackets is only to help distinguish two different authors when they are first authors of two different works in the reference list.

If I understand you correctly, you read and are citing only the 2015 book, right? If so, and if in the copyright or title page the publisher does not refer to this edition as a "reprinting," I would simply use "Classic ed." in the parenthesis where you normally have an edition number. That and the date (2015) should be enough to ensure that a reader aiming to retrieve the book would look for and find the same version you used.

Hi, Rachel. Great question. I think your adaptation for a book chapter published online in advance of print makes good sense. If the page numbers are known, you could include them after the title of the book as usual (http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/02/books-and-book-chapters-what-to-cite.html). If not, just leave them out. And, I agree with you on putting "Advance online publication" before the DOI. When this post was written (2012), we had journal articles in mind. Do you see this often with book chapters? And, are there good examples you can point us to? Thanks, Tim

Excellent point. We would generally recommend italicizing words used as words. That would be our general preference, but in this context, one could argue that there's no possibility of a reader misunderstanding, as the context makes it clear that these are words used in a database search.

You are on the right track. I would write "(Name of Institution A, 2016; cf. Name of Institution A, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2013, 2018)." That is, this is similar to how you might write (Monahan, 2018; see also McAdoo, 2017)." (Another example of that is on p. 168 in the Publication Manual, just above 6.17.)