A note on citation styles

The American Psychological Association has been complicit in torture. This complicity has persisted despite claims of reform[1] and the organization appears intent on enabling abuse.[2] This is absolutely unacceptable and ethically, I have long felt I cannot participate in the organization, even in its more enlightened aspects, or accept the organization as authoritative on anything, including on citation styles.

I realize that rejecting a citation style is a pathetic response to crimes against humanity. It is the one response I have.

All citation styles suck. They are inconsistent and poorly documented. Sometimes they are even impractical.

For me, Chicago style is a distinct lesser of evils. Footnotes do not detract so much from the text.

However, much of the work I have done towards my Ph.D. was at institutions that required APA style. As I incorporate such work into my present work, I am adopting the following practice:

    Where Chicago relies on footnotes or endnotes, APA uses parenthetical citations. Within quotations of my own work using APA style, I will add Chicago-style footnotes within the parenthetical citations to works cited.

Owing to the length of time that has transpired since I originally found these articles and the present, in some cases, citations will be updated to reflect information found as I revisit them. Inevitably, there will be corrections.

  1. [1]James Risen, “American Psychological Association Bolstered C.I.A. Torture Program, Report Says,” New York Times, April 30, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/report-says-american-psychological-association-collaborated-on-torture-justification.html
  2. [2]Human Rights Watch, “Nine Rights Groups Tell APA Don’t Undermine Independent Psychological Care at Guantanamo,” August 9, 2018, https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/06/nine-rights-groups-tell-apa-dont-undermine-independent-psychological-care-guantanamo