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.)

I can see your point. For the book's title, for instance, we want the reference to exactly reflect what is shown in the published book. However, for the location, we recommend including the state, even in that circumstance.

Great question! We order them as you have shown, alphabetizing letter by letter and considering only the visible names. The guidance to "alphabetize letter by letter" is on p. 181, but the case you present here is not directly addressed.

Hi, Elijeshca. You are on the right track! You're right that we recommend including any kind of identifying number (see first bullet in 7.03) that has been assigned to the report, as that might help your readers find the document at a later date. Just a few changes are needed in your reference. The title should be in sentence case, and the retrieval date is not needed. That is, you can follow Example 31, replacing the wording with yours: United Nations. (2018). World economic situation and prospects 2018 (Sales No. E.18.II.C.2). Retrieved from https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/publication/WESP2018_Full_Web.pdf

Good question! We use parentheses for lettered lists only (see http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/02/lists-part-4-numbered-lists.html for examples of numbered lists). We don't have guidelines for how to refer to items on the list. You might refer to them based on the content, if that would be clear. Or, if it's more clear to refer to them by numbers, you might discuss them as "Item 1," "Item 2," and so on. For example, "As noted in Item 3, ..." The word "Item" might be something else, depending on the context. For example, "As noted earlier, Participant 3 found that.." Whatever word is there should be capitalized to follow our guideline of capitalizing words "followed by numerals or letters that denote a specific place in a numbered series" (p. 103 of the Manual).

Good question! That's unusual, but you're on the right track. We would abbreviate "part" to "Pt." (see list on p. 180 of the Manual: Logue, H. (2012). Why naïve realism? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 112(2, Pt. 2), 211–237.

Good question. We recommend following the most current guidelines whenever possible. That is, https://doi.org/10.1037/arc0000014 We would not recommend making links of the "doi:" format.

Thanks! That is an interesting example. Looking at the cover and also some introductory text, it appears that the 8th edition of the book just has two authors now instead of one. That is Dr. Needlman has used Dr. Spock's original words but updated them, so the end result is a book with words by both. Both are credited on the cover, so the end result is Spock, B., & Needlman, R. (2004). Dr. Spock's baby and child care (8th ed.). New York, NY: Pocket Books.

Hi, Christina. Yes, your example looks fine.

If the PowerPoint is retrievable online, then create the reference using the template shown at http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/11/how-to-cite-something-you-found-on-a-website-in-apa-style.html. If you cite the text of the slide, you can include something like "Slide 5" with your citation (see http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/11/how-to-cite-part-of-a-work.html). Or, if you cite an audio portion, then you can use a time stamp (see http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2014/01/timestamps-for-audiovisual-materials-in-apa-style.html).

Happy to help! Yes, do capitalize the names of subscales when they have official names. (For example, if a test says that "the first subscale measures students' expectations," that's different than if the test says that the first subscale "is the Expectations scale.") See also the "MMPI Depression scale" example on page 103 of the Publication Manual.

Good question. Yes, put those references in the reference list, too. The citation will appear in the footnote just as it would in text. The font size for footnotes in a manuscript does not differ from the regular text (see also http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/03/fonts-of-knowledge.html).

Hi. Good questions. Yes, the guidance about SurveyMonkey still applies. The URL is needed only the first time of a general mention. If later mentions are the same, you don't need to include the URL each time.

Right. You can see examples at the bottom of the following post: http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/01/alphabetizing-in-press-and-no-date-references.html

No, count only the words you are quoting.

Hi, NorKnightSSmith. Chelsea replied in the post about tables, but for other readers wondering: Follow the usual formatting guidelines for quotations (see Block Quotations in APA Style and How to Cite Direct Quotations) when they appear in a table or a figure.

Sorry for the delay. No, when a DOI is available, we recommend including only the DOI. In that example, though, the DOI is not shown on the page (or the PDF), as far as I could tell. An author would probably use the URL because he or she wouldn't have a way to know that a DOI exists.

"In 2015, the..." is fine. You can find an example in the paragraph that begins "Alternatively" on page 171 of the Publication Manual.

Yes, we generally recommend spelling out dates in most cases: April 3, 2013. In a table, you might make an exception to this guideline if you have many dates to compare and/or for space considerations. Just use your judgement on whether the readers will benefit most from the shortened or spelled-out version.

You can find examples of block quote formatting at the end of http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/06/block-quotations-in-apa-style.html.