Cite It Right: Critical Assessment of Open Source
Web-Based Citation Generators
Hui-Fen Chang
Introduction
Writing proper citations is a critically important part
of the research process. Citing involves careful documenting
the sources of those individuals whose ideas and studies have
direct influence on one’s research. Citing sources acknowledges
the origin of information, and allows others to find the source
materials. Instructing students when and how to cite is a
key component of information literacy initiatives for many
academic and research libraries. To further support students,
many libraries have purchased the licenses to bibliographic
management software packages such as RefWorks and EndNote
to help manage citations. Oklahoma State University provides
the Endnote software, and the library provides user training
and tech support to all students and faculty. EndNote has the
capability of importing citations directly from subscription
databases, and the capability of managing a large number
of bibliographies formatted in a variety of citation styles.
Nevertheless, the drawbacks of these products are several: they
are expensive, they have an extensive learning curve, and they
often require assistance from librarians.
Recently, a number of free or inexpensive Web-based
citation generators including EasyBib, NoodleBib, BibMe,
KnightCite, Citation Machine, Citation Builder and SourceAid
have emerged and gained the attention of students as well as
teaching librarians. These programs not only are very accessible
via the Web, they are designed to be easy to use. Input templates
Chang (Assistant Professor/Humanities &
Social Sciences Division)
Oklahoma State University [Stillwater, OK]
-Cite It Right: Critical Assessment of Open Source...-
are available in these programs that allow the users to quickly
and easily create citations in a variety of source types (books,
journals, magazines and newspapers); formats (print or online);
and output styles (MLA, APA or Chicago).
While these tools are designed to emphasize ease of
use, the accuracy of these programs remains to be investigated.
In other word, are any of these tools reliable enough to be
recommended to students? This study took a critical approach
to assess the accuracy of these citation generators. The findings
of this study will hopefully shed some light on the suitability of
free web-based citation generators for college students.
Literature Review
While there are studies reviewing the bibliographic
management software packages like EndNote or RefWorks,
there is very little written about free Web-based citation
generators. Kessler (2007) reviewed the program of SourceAid
Pro PE, a Web-based citation generator. While SourceAid
Pro PE has some attractive features such as the capability of
generating bibliographies in APA, MLA, CMS and CSE,
Kessler noted that due to the errors produced in the program
and the lack of input instructions, users are very likely to
generate incorrect citations. Jennings (2003) compared basic
features of the citation generator EasyBib and the bibliographic
management software RefWorks. The author rated EasyBib
higher than RefWorks, despite the more advanced functionality
of RefWorks, noting that entering references manually is more
difficult in RefWorks than EasyBib, and that undergraduates
found RefWorks difficult to use and required more assistance
from librarians. Kessler and Van Ullen (2005) conducted a
thorough study comparing two citation generator programs,
EasyBib and NoodleBib with EndNote, for accuracy, ease of
use and suitability for an undergraduate environment. The study
LOEX-2011 61
analyzed bibliographies generated by these three programs in
the APA style format (5th edition). Errors were also categorized
into user errors, software errors and other error types, and the
overall results showed that NoodleBib generated the fewest
EasyBib
produced
the
rate
ofinstructions,
errors. Kessler
that errors,
due to theand
errors
produced in
the program
andhighest
the lack of
input
users are
and
Van
Ullen
concluded
that
free
programs
such
as NoodleBib
very likely to generate incorrect citations. Jennings (2003) compared basic
features of
the citation
generator EasyBib
and the
bibliographic
management
software RefWorks.
and EasyBib
may offer
some
advantages
to undergraduates,
but
The they
author also
rated EasyBib
higher than
despite the more
emphasized
thatRefWorks,
some knowledge
ofadvanced
properfunctionality
citation
of RefWorks, noting that entering references manually is more difficult in RefWorks than
formats is necessary to use these programs effectively.
EasyBib, and that undergraduates found RefWorks difficult to use and required more
assistance from librarians. Kessler and Van Ullen (2005) conducted a thorough study
ackground
comparing
two citation generator programs, EasyBib and NoodleBib with EndNote, for
accuracy, ease of use and suitability for an undergraduate environment. The study
analyzed bibliographies
generated
by these three
programs
in the generators
APA style format
(5th
In order
to determine
which
citation
would
edition).
Errors
were
also
categorized
into
user
errors,
software
errors
and
other
error
be examined in this study, two preliminary investigations
types, and the overall results showed that NoodleBib generated the fewest errors, and
were undertaken by the author. A Google search for ‘Citation
EasyBib produced the highest rate of errors. Kessler and Van Ullen concluded that free
Generator’
and a search
for ‘Citation
Builder’
were
performed.
programs
such as NoodleBib
and EasyBib
may offer some
advantages
to undergraduates,
A web
survey ofthat
126some
ARL
member
libraries
was
alsoisconducted
but they
also emphasized
knowledge
of proper
citation
formats
necessary to
use these
programs
to see
whateffectively.
free citation generators were recommended by
B
libraries. Figure 1 shows the results of the survey of ARL member
Background
libraries. Of the 39 ARL library websites that recommended
In order to determine which citation generators would be examined in this study,
citation generators by linking, 20 libraries linked to Citation
two preliminary investigations were undertaken by the author. A Google search for
Machine,
15and
linked
toforEasyBib,
10 linked
to BibMe,
9 linked
„Citation
Generator‟
a search
„Citation Builder’
were performed.
A web
survey of
KnightCite,
8 linked
NCSUto see
Citation
Builder,
4 linked
to
126 to
ARL
member libraries
was also to
conducted
what free
citation generators
were
recommended
by libraries.
Figure
1 shows
the results
of the survey
of ARL
member
NoodleBib
Express,
and
2 linked
to UNC
Citation
Builder.
libraries. Of the 39 ARL library websites that recommended citation generators by
linking, 20 libraries linked to Citation Machine, 15 linked to EasyBib, 10 linked to
Figure 1: Number of Links of Citation Generators
BibMe, 9 linked to KnightCite, 8 linked to NCSU Citation Builder, 4 linked to
ARLto Member
NoodleBib Express, and 2 linked
UNC Citation Libraries
Builder.
by
30
20
10
0
Citation
Machine
EasyBib
BibMe
KnightCite
NCSU
Citation
Builder
NoodleBib
UNC
Citation
Builder
SourceAid
Figure 1. Number of Links of Citation Generators by ARL Member Libraries
These same eight web-based citation generators were
These same eight web-based citation generators were elected for this study. To
elected
for
this
study.
determine
all eight
determine whether all
eight
citation To
generators
supportwhether
the latest edition
of the citation
MLA,
support
the of
latest
edition
of thewebsite
MLA,wasAPA
and
APAgenerators
and Chicago formats,
a review
each citation
generator‟s
conducted.
ThisChicago
step involved
a review of
the HELPof
section
the Q&A section
of the program
formats,
a review
eachor citation
generator’s
website
homepage.
The results areThis
listedstep
in Table
1.
was conducted.
involved
a review of the HELP section
or the Q&A section of the program
homepage. The results are
3
listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Citation Styles and Editions Available in
Citation
Generators
Table 1. Citation Styles
and Editions
Available in Citation Generators
MLA
APA
Chicago
7
6 (subscription required)
16 (subscription required)
NoodleBib Express
7
KnightCite
7
EasyBib
Citation Machine
NCSU Citation Builder
UNC Citation Builder
BibMe
SourceAid
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
16
Data Collection
Sample references from the current editions of the
MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers (7th edition,
2009), Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th edition, 2010), and The Chicago Manual of Style
(16th edition, 2010) were used to test the accuracy of citation
generators. A total of sixty-three sample references from three
style manuals were selected. These sample references covered
commonly used source types including: book by a single
author; book by multiple authors; anthology; book chapter or a
work in an anthology; thesis or dissertation; journal, magazine
and newspaper articles; entry in a reference work; and website.
Twenty-two sample references were selected from the MLA
handbook, 18 sample references were selected from the APA
manual, and 23 references were selected from the Chicago
manual.
Sample references were then manually entered into
citation generators by the author to create bibliographies for
data analysis. The bibliographies were then reviewed and
compared to the sample references from the citation manuals
to determine the accuracy of the free citation programs. Errors
were then recorded and categorized in Excel spreadsheets. Errors
were categorized as the following: incorrect capitalization;
punctuation error; improperly formatted retrieval statement;
publication date; problem with volume or issue information;
problem with formatted page number; error in publisher and/
or place of publication; and syntax errors, which involved
incorrect placement of elements within a citation. An example
of a syntax error is:
(1) Bordo, Susan, Pamela R. Matthews, and David
McWhirter. “The Moral Content of Nobokov’s Lolita.” Aesthetic
Subjects. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2003. 125-52. Print.
The correct format based on MLA is:
(2) Bordo, Susan. “The Moral Content of Nobokov’s
Lolita.” Aesthetic Subjects. Ed. Pamela R. Matthews and David
McWhirter. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2003. 125-52.
Print.
N/A
If multiple types of errors were present within any
citation, each error was noted. If the source output template was
not included in the free software (for example, several programs
lacked the templates for theses and dissertations), this was
recorded and categorized as an error.
15
Error Analysis of MLA Style Format
15
15
15
15
The results indicate that most of the free citation
The results indicate that most of the free citation programs support the latest (7th) edition
programs
the latest
(7th) support
edition
MLA.
Fiveofof
the
of MLA.
Five ofsupport
the eight citation
generators
theof
latest
(6th) edition
APA.
NoodleBib
and EasyBib
are the onlysupport
programsthe
that latest
support (6
thethlatest
editions
MLA,
eight citation
generators
) edition
ofofAPA.
APA and Chicago styles. While most of these programs are completely free, EasyBib
offers free access to MLA but requires subscription to use APA and Chicago.
LOEX-2011
Data62
Collection
Sample references from the current editions of the MLA Handbook for Writers of
th
NoodleBib and EasyBib are the only programs that support the
latest editions of MLA, APA and Chicago styles. While most of
these programs are completely free, EasyBib offers free access
to MLA but requires subscription to use APA and Chicago.
A total of twenty-two sample references from the MLA
Handbook for Writers of Research Papers were entered into
seven of the eight citation generators—no sample references
were entered in SourceAid since it did not support the current
-Chang-
programs lacked the templates for theses and dissertations), this was recorded and
categorized as an error.
Error Analysis of MLA Style Format
editionA of
Of the
twenty-two
sample
fourteen
totalMLA.
of twenty-two
sample
references from
the MLAreferences,
Handbook for Writers
of
Research
Papers
were entered into
seven
of thewere
eight citation
sample
were
print
publications
and
eight
web generators—no
publications.
These
references were entered in SourceAid since it did not support the current edition of MLA.
sample
references are further detailed in Table 2:
Of the twenty-two sample references, fourteen were print publications and eight were
web publications. These sample references are further detailed in Table 2:
Table 2: Sample
References from MLA Handbook
Table 2. Sample References from MLA Handbook
Print Publications
Web Publications
Book by a single author
Book by more than 3 authors
An anthology
Book by a corporate author
Book in a subsequent edition
A translation
Published Dissertation
Work in an Anthology
Article in a specialized reference work
Article in a (well-known) encyclopedia
Entry in a (well-known) dictionary
Article in a scholarly journal
Article in a magazine
Article in a newspaper (non-consecutive
pages)
Book, single author, Google Book Search
Dissertation
Article in a (well-known) online encyclopedia
Article in a scholarly journal, in library database
Article in a magazine, in library database
Article in a newspaper, non-consecutive pages, in
library database
Website
for theses and dissertations. Syntax errors were also common
in the citations produced by several citation programs. One such
syntax error came from the program’s inability to accommodate
different contributors to a source. An example citation is:
(3) Homer. The Odyssey. Trans. Robert Fagles. New
York: Viking, 1996. Print.
Several programs generated a error citation as:
(4) Homer, and Robert Fagles. The Odyssey. New
York: Viking, 1996.
Error Analysis of the APA Style Format
To test the APA style citations, a total of eighteen
samples from the Publication Manual of the Psychological
Association were entered in NoodleBib, EasyBib, KnightCite,
(4) Homer, and Robert Fagles. The Odyssey. New York: Viking, 1996.
Citation Machine and NCSU Citation Builder since they all
supported the latest edition of APA. Of the eighteen sample
Error Analysis of the APA Style Format
references, seven were print sources and eleven were electronic
To test
the APA
style citations,
a total of eighteen
samples detailed
from the Publication
sources.
These
sample
references
are further
in Table
Manual of the Psychological Association were entered in NoodleBib, EasyBib,
3:KnightCite, Citation Machine and NCSU Citation Builder since they all supported the
5
Figure 2 shows the total number of errors generated
by each program in the MLA format. NoodleBib and EasyBib
produced the lowest numbers of incorrect citations in MLA
format-- 2 errors (or 9 percent of total errors) and 3 errors (13.6
percent of total errors) respectively, while Citation Machine
latest edition of APA. Of the eighteen sample references, seven were print sources and
yielded the largest number, generating 19 errors (86 percent of
Figure 2 shows the total number of errors generated by each program in the MLA format. eleven were electronic sources. These sample references are further detailed in Table 3:
Table 3: Sample References from
total
errors).
Figure
2 shows
total number
of the
errors
generated
byofeach
program
in theinMLA
NoodleBib
andthe
EasyBib
produced
lowest
numbers
incorrect
citations
MLAformat.
Publication Manual of APA
NoodleBib
EasyBib
produced
the lowest
numbers
of (13.6
incorrect
citations
inerrors)
MLA
format-- 2and
errors
(or 9 percent
of total
errors) and
3 errors
percent
of total
Table 3. Sample References from Publication Manual of APA
Figure
2: Total
Errors
Produced
by percent
Citation
format-2 errors
(or Citation
9 percent
of total
errors) the
and
3 errors
(13.6
of total
errors)
respectively,
while
Machine
yielded
largest
number,
generating
19 errors
(86
Print Sources
Electronic Sources
respectively,
while
CitationGenerators
Machine yieldedintheMLA
largest Style
number, generating 19 errors (86
percent of total
errors).
percent of total errors).
Entire book, single author
Master‟s thesis, from a commercial database
BibMe
NCSU CitationBibMe
Builder
# of errors
NCSU CitationKnightCite
Builder
KnightCite
NoodleBib
NoodleBib
0
5
10
15
# of errors
20
Book chapter
Reference book
Entry in a reference book
Article in a scholarly journal
Article in a magazine
Article in a newspaper, non-consecutive pages
0
5
15
Figure 2. Total
Errors Produced
by10
Citation Generators
in 20
MLA Style
Figure 3 shows the errors produced from print sources
Figurethe
2. Total
Errors
Produced
by Citation
Generators
in
Stylesources
Figure
shows
errors
produced
from
print
sources
compared
toMLA
electronic
as3compared
to electronic
sources
for allas
seven
programs.
for all seven programs.
Figure 3 shows the errors produced from print sources as compared to electronic sources
Figure 3: Error by Formats in MLA
for all seven programs.
**DOI is an abbreviation for Digital Object Identifier, a
unique alphanumeric string (e.g. doi: 10.1086/597483)
assigned to a publication. As a digital identifier, a DOI
also provides a means of looking up the current location
of the publication on the Web. The latest editions of APA
(6th) and Chicago (16th) recommend the inclusion of a
DOI when it is available.
BibMe
UNC Citation Builder
NCSU CitationBibMe
Builder
UNC Citation
CitationBuilder
Machine
NCSU Citation
Builder
KnightCite
Electronic
Print
Electronic
Citation Machine
EasyBib
NoodleBib
KnightCite
EasyBib
NoodleBib
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Figure
3. Error
by
Formats
in10MLA 12
2
4
6
8
14
14
Print
Figure 4 shows the total number of errors generated by these programs. NoodleBib
produced no errors in APA, while EasyBib produced a total of 6 errors (33.3 percent of
Figure 4 shows the total number of errors generated by
the total number of errors) and Citation Machine yielded the largest number, generating
these
programs.
NoodleBib
14 errors
(77.8 percent of
total errors). produced no errors in APA, while
EasyBib produced a total of 6 errors (33.3 percent of the total
number of errors) and Citation Machine yielded the largest
number, generating 14 errors (77.8 percent of total errors).
Citation Machine generated
the highest
number
of errorsinfor
print sources, while UNC
Figure
3. Error
by Formats
MLA
Citation Builder produced the highest number of errors for electronic sources.
Citation
Machine
generated
of errors
forsources;
print sources,
while
NoodleBib
and EasyBib
didthe
nothighest
producenumber
any errors
for print
all errors
wereUNC
for
electronic
sources.
Citation
Builder
produced
highest number
of errorsthe
for electronic
CitationtheMachine
generated
highest sources.
number of
NoodleBib
andfor
EasyBib
not produce
anyUNC
errorsCitation
for print sources;
all produced
errors were for
errors
print did
sources,
while
Builder
Several programs did not have the capability of generating citations for specific
electronic
sources.
the
highest
number
of
errors
for
electronic
sources.
NoodleBib
source types such as PhD dissertations. Only NoodleBib and EasyBib included templates
and
EasyBib
diddidnot
anyalso
errors
forinprint
sources;
all
for theses
and
dissertations.
Syntax
errors
were
common
thecitations
citations
produced
Several
programs
not produce
have
the capability
of generating
for
specific
by
several
citation
programs.
One
such
syntax
error
came
from
the
program‟s
inability
to
errors
were
for
electronic
sources.
source types such as PhD dissertations. Only NoodleBib and EasyBib included templates
different contributors
to a source.
An example
is:
foraccommodate
theses and dissertations.
Syntax errors
were also
commoncitation
in the citations
produced
Several
programs
did
not
have 1996.
thethe
capability
of to
by(3)
several
programs.
such
syntax
program‟s inability
Homer.citation
The Odyssey.
Trans.One
Robert
Fagles.
Newerror
York:came
Viking,from
Print.
accommodate
different
contributors
a source. source
An example
citation
is: as PhD
generating
citations
for tospecific
types
such
Several
programs generated
error citation as:
dissertations.
OnlyaNoodleBib
and EasyBib included templates
(3) Homer. The Odyssey. Trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Viking, 1996. Print.
Several programs generated a error citation as:
6
PhD Dissertation, from an institutional
database
Electronic version of a book
Electronic only book
Entry in an online reference work
Entry in an online reference work, no
author/date
Journal articles, with DOI**
Journal article, with DOI, more than 7 authors
Online journal article, without DOI
Online magazine article, without DOI
Online newspaper article, without DOI
Figure 4: Total Errors Produced by Citation
7
Generators in APA Style
NCSU Citation Builder
Citation Machine
KnightCite
# of errors
EasyBib
NoodleBib
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Figure 4. Total Errors Produced by Citation Generators in APA Style
-Cite It Right: Critical Assessment of Open Source...- Figure 5 sorts the APA errors by print or electronic format. LOEX-2011 63
6
To test the Chicago style citations, a total of twenty-two sample references from
To test the Chicago style citations, a total of twenty-two sample references from
The Chicago
of Style
werewere
entered
EasyBib
since
TheManual
Chicago Manual
of Style
enteredin
in NoodleBib
NoodleBib and and
EasyBib
since these
werethese were
NoodleBib
the only programs
that supported
latestedition
edition ofof
Chicago.
Of theOf
twenty-three
the only programs
that supported
thethe
latest
Chicago.
the twenty-three
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
sample references, twelve were print sources and eleven were electronic sources. These
sample references,
twelve were print sources and eleven were electronic sources. These
Figure 5 sorts the APA errors by print or electronic
4:detailed
Sample
from
sample referencesTable
are further
in TableReferences
4:
Figure 4. Total Errors Produced by Citation Generators in APA Style
sample
references
are
further detailed in Table 4:
format.
KnightCite
# of errors
EasyBib
Chicago Manual of Style
Table 4. Sample References from Chicago Manual of Style
Figure 5 sorts the APA
errors by
or electronic
format.
Figure
5:print
Error
by Formats
in APA
NCSU Citation Builder
Citation Machine
KnightCite
EasyBib
NoodleBib
0
2
4
6
8
10
Table 4.
Sample
Manual
of Style
Print
Sources References from Chicago
Electronic
Sources
Book, Print
one author
Sources
Book with an editor
Book, more than 2 authors
Book, one author
Book, more than 2 editors
Book with anBook,
editor
organization as author
Electronic
Book, 2
edition
other than the first
Book, more than
authors
Citing a multi-volume as a whole
Print
Book, more than
2
editors
Chapter in an edited book
Book, organization
author
Article in as
a journal
a magazine
Book, editionArticle
otherin than
the first
Article in a newspaper
Citing a multi-volume
as
a whole
Series title
Book published electronically,
Kindle
edition
Electronic
Sources
Book published electronically, without DOI
Book published electronically, with DOI
Book published electronically, Kindle edition
Book review, consulted online
Book encyclopedia
published electronically, without DOI
Online
Article
a journal, with
DOI
Book inpublished
electronically,
with DOI
Article in a journal, without DOI
Book
review,
consulted
online
Article in an online magazine
Onlinein encyclopedia
Article
an online newspaper
Digital
dissertation
Article
in a journal, with DOI
Website
Article in a journal, without DOI
Chapter in an edited book
Article in an online magazine
Citation Machine and NCSU Citation Builderin a journal
Article in an online newspaper
Citation Machine and NCSU Citation Builder produced the highest numberArticle
of errors for
produced the highest number of errors for print formatsArticle
(eachin a magazineFigure 6 shows the total number of errors
Digital
dissertation
produced
by NoodleBib and EasyBib
print formats (each produced 5 errors, or 71 percent of the total number of errors), while
produced 5 errors, or 71 percent of the total number of errors),
when generating citations in Chicago style. Both
programs performed quite well in the
Article
a newspaper
Website
Citation Machine generated the highest number of errors (9 errors, or 81 percent
of in
total
Figure 6 shows the total number of errors produced by
Citation
Machine
generated
theofhighest
ofSeries
errors
title Chicago style format, as each produced only 2 errors (8 percent of the total number of
errors)while
for electronic
sources.
A closer
examination
electronicnumber
format errors
revealed
NoodleBib
and EasyBib when generating citations in Chicago
errors).
(9 errors,
or was
81 the
percent
of totalthaterrors)
forerrors
electronic
sources.
that Citation
Machine
only program
generated
in the online
retrieval
style. Both programs performed quite well in the Chicago style
A closer
ofinvolved.
electronic
that
statement
where aexamination
DOI number was
Theformat
program errors
providedrevealed
a source template
format, as EasyBib
each produced only 2 errors (8 percent of the total
for electronic
sources
that allows
fill in a URL
and
a DOI, but errors
did not in
give
Citation
Machine
wasthe
theusers
onlytoprogram
that
generated
NoodleBib
Figure
6
shows
the total number of errors produced by
and EasyBib
number
of
errors).
# ofNoodleBib
Error
clear instructions
the users statement
how to use DOIs
versus
URLs
when citing
online sources.
the onlinetoretrieval
where
a DOI
number
was involved.
2 programs
3
whenMachine
generating citations in0Chicago 1style. Both
performed quite well in the
When both
a
DOI
and
a
URL
were
entered
in
the
template,
the
program
Citation
The program provided a source template for electronic sources
Chicago style format, as each
produced
onlyProduced
2 errorsin (8
percent
did not have the capability of generating only the DOI number in the citation,
Figure
6. Total Errors
Chicago
Style of the total number of
that allows the users to fill in a URL and a DOI, but did notasgive
NoodleBib and EasyBib were able to.
errors).
Figure 6: Total Errors Produced in Chicago Style
Figure 5. Error by Formats in APA
clear instructions to the users how to use DOIs versus URLs Figure 7 shows print versus electronic errors in Chicago produced by NoodleBib and
NoodleBib generated 1 error for print sources and 1 error for electronic sources,
KnightCite
produced
errors forWhen
print sources
generated
errors (72.7
when
citing
onlinenosources.
both abutDOI
and a8 URL
were EasyBib.
while EasyBib generated 2 errors for electronic sources.
percententered
of total errors)
electronic the
sources.
Most ofCitation
these errors
in KnightCite
involved EasyBib
in thefortemplate,
program
Machine
did not
incorrectly
date of retrieval
to citations where
was notinnecessary.
haveadding
the capability
of generating
onlythis
theinformation
DOI number
the
NoodleBib
# of Error
According to APA, no retrieval date is needed for online sources unless the source
citation, as NoodleBib and EasyBib were able to.
material may change over time such as Wikis. The incorrect citations generated in
KnightCite were mostly electronic books or an entry from an online reference work or
KnightCite produced no errors for print sources but
from an online periodical.
0
1
9
2
3
Figure 6. Total Errors Produced in Chicago Style
generated 8 errors (72.7 percent of total errors) for electronic
Figure 7 shows print versus electronic errors in Chicago
sources. Most of these errors in KnightCite involved incorrectly
Figure 7 shows
print versus
electronic and
errors
in Chicago
produced by
NoodleBib
produced
by NoodleBib
EasyBib.
NoodleBib
generated
1 and
8
adding date of retrieval to citations where this information
was NoodleBib
EasyBib.
generated
1
error
for
print
sources
and
1
error
for
electronic
error for print sources and 1 error for electronic sources, while sources,
not necessary. According to APA, no retrieval date is while
needed
EasyBib
generated
2 errors2 for
electronic
sources. sources.
EasyBib
generated
errors
for electronic
for online sources unless the source material may change
over time such as Wikis. The incorrect citations generated in
Figure 7: Error by Formats in Chicago Style
KnightCite were mostly electronic books or an entry from an
online reference work or from an online periodical.
Error Analysis of the Chicago Style Format
EasyBib
NoodleBib
9
Electronic
Print
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
To test the Chicago style citations, a total of twentytwo sample references from The Chicago Manual of Style were
Figure 7. Error by Formats in Chicago Style
entered in NoodleBib and EasyBib since these were the only
Incorrect citations in NoodleBib included minor errors
programs that supported the latest edition of Chicago.Incorrect
Of the citations
in NoodleBib
included minor
the publication
information.
in the publication
information.
Theerrors
errorsinproduced
in EasyBib
twenty-three sample references, twelve were print sources
and produced
involvedinincorrect
punctuation
in the
citation in
forthea citation
digital for a digital
The errors
EasyBib involved
incorrect
punctuation
eleven were electronic sources. These sample references
are in
dissertation
(5), and
syntax
error inforthe
entry
dissertation
(5), and a in
syntax
errora in
the citation
ancitation
entry infor
an an
online
encyclopedia
further detailed in Table 4:
online
encyclopedia
in (6) where the title of article was
in (6) wherein
theantitle
of article
was missing:
missing:
(5) Choi, Mihwa. Contesting Imaginaries in Death Rituals during the North Song Dynasty.
Mihwa.
Contesting
Imaginaries in Death Rituals
Diss.,(5)
UniversityChoi,
of Chicago,
2008.
ProQuest.
during the North Song Dynasty. Diss., University of Chicago,
2008.toProQuest.
Compared
the citation given in The Chicago Manual of Style:
to the Imaginaries
citation given
in The
Chicago
Manual
ofSong
Choi,Compared
Mihwa. “Contesting
in Death
Rituals
during the
Northern
Style:PhD diss., University of Chicago, 2008. ProQuest (AAT 3300426).
Dynasty.”
Choi, Mihwa. “Contesting Imaginaries in Death Rituals
(6) Isaacson, Melissa. Encyclopedia of Chicago. Edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann D. Keating, and
during the Northern Song Dynasty.” PhD diss., University of
James R. Grossman. Chicago: Chicago Historical Society, 2005.
http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/184.html
64
LOEX-2011
Compared to the citation given in The Chicago Manual of Style:
-Chang-
Isaacson, Melissa. “Bulls.” In Encyclopedia of Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann D.
Chicago, 2008. ProQuest (AAT 3300426).
(6)
Isaacson, Melissa. Encyclopedia of Chicago. Edited
by Janice L. Reiff, Ann D. Keating, and James R. Grossman.
Chicago: Chicago Historical Society, 2005. http://www.
encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/184.html
Compared to the citation given in The Chicago Manual of
Style:
Isaacson, Melissa. “Bulls.” In Encyclopedia of
Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann D. Keating, and James
R. Grossman. Chicago Historical Society, 2005. http://www.
encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/184.html.
Discussion
Based on the above analyses, NoodleBib and EasyBib
emerged as the top citation generators. Not only did NoodleBib
and EasyBib support the latest editions of MLA, APA and
Chicago styles, these tools also performed more accurately
compared to other free programs, with NoodleBib ranking
slightly higher than EasyBib. The greater accuracy of these two
programs was attributed to the online help tips provided. For
instance, NoodleBib provided rather extensive step-by-step,
field-by-field help to instruct the users on the various citation
rules and conventions as required by the appropriate citation
style. The NoodleBib data entry screen, shown below, contained
the following instructions on how to format an online retrieval
statement for a citation in Chicago style:
Another example that illustrates helpful instructions is the MLA rules for
publisher abbreviations provided in NoodleBib. This help screen, shown below, would be
helpful to users who are unfamiliar with the style requirement:
-Cite It Right: Critical Assessment of Open Source...-
LOEX-2011 65
Another example that illustrates helpful instructions References
is the Another
MLA rules
forthat
publisher
abbreviations
provided
inMLA rules for
example
illustrates
helpful instructions
is the
American
Psychological
Association. (2010). Publication
NoodleBib.
This
help
screen,
shown
below,
would
be
helpful
to
publisher
abbreviations
provided
in
NoodleBib.
This
help
screen,
shown
below,
be
Another example that illustrates helpful instructions is the
MLA
ruleswould
for
manual
of
the
american
psychological association
helpful
to
users
who
are
unfamiliar
with
the
style
requirement:
users
who
are
unfamiliar
with
the
style
requirement:
publisher abbreviations provided in NoodleBib. This help screen, shown below, would be
th
(6
ed.).
Washington,
DC:
American Psychological
helpful to users who are unfamiliar with the style requirement:
Association.
Jennings, A. F. (July, 2003). RefWorks and EasyBib.com: A
comparison of the basic features of two electronic
citation formatting products. Charleston Advisor, 5(1),
18-21.
Kessler, J. (2007). SourceAid Citation Builder Pro PE.
Charleston Advisor, 8(4), 44-46.
EasyBib also provided a similar help screen:
EasyBib EasyBib
also provided
a similar ahelp
screen:
also provided
similar
help screen:
Kessler, J. and Van Ullen, M. K. (2005). Citation generators:
Generating bibliographies for the next generation. The
Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31(4), 310-316.
Modern Language Association. (2009). MLA handbook for
writers of research papers (7th ed.). New York, NY:
MLA.
Conclusion
University of Chicago Press. (2010). The chicago manual of
style (16th ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Open source web-based citation generators have emerged in recent years as
Conclusion
Conclusion
alternatives
to subscription-based bibliographic management software packages like
source web-based
citation
generators
have emerged
recentgenerators.
years as
EndNoteOpen
and RefWorks.
This study
examined
the accuracy
of eight in
citation
Open source web-based citation generators have
Based
on
the
accuracy
of
the
bibliographies
they
produced,
NoodleBib
and
EasyBib
alternatives
to
subscription-based
bibliographic
management
software
packages
like
emerged in recent years as alternatives to subscription-based
EndNote
and RefWorks.
This
study examined
accuracy
of eight citation generators.
bibliographic
management
software
packagesthelike
EndNote
Based
on the accuracy
the bibliographies
they
produced,
NoodleBib
and EasyBib
and RefWorks.
This of
study
examined the
accuracy
of
eight
11
citation generators. Based on the accuracy of the bibliographies
they produced, NoodleBib and EasyBib proved to be the most
11
reliable citation generators out of those studied. However, even
the best free programs are not completely without errors and
limitations. Some ‘free’ programs, such as EasyBib, allow the
users to do certain tasks free of charge but require payment
for other functions. If librarians recommend these tools to
students, they should also provide guidance to students in
regard to these programs. Instruction on how to use these
programs would increase the accuracy of citations generated
by students. Furthermore, as Kessler and Van Ullen (2005)
point out, instruction on citation generators by librarians
not only should include a sense of the limitations of these
programs, but should specify that “the ultimate responsibility
of accurate citations rests with the users” (p. 316). Even with
high accuracy programs like NoodleBib and EasyBib, the need
for students to consult the appropriate style manual cannot be
stressed enough.
66
LOEX-2011
-Chang-