MHRA Repeated Citation Not Appearing Correctly

I have a citation that doesn't appear to be correctly shown.

I'm using MHRA 3rd Edition (Note with Bibliography) in a paper that I'm currently writing. When I use the same citation immediately following a previous use of the citation it is showing the short title unnecessarily.

The Footnote Sequence is showing as:

7. This was subsequently published in the official minutes from the Institute as: Albert C. Outler, ‘A New Future for Wesleyan Studies: An Agenda for “Phase III”’, in The Future of the Methodist Theological Traditions, ed. by M Douglas Meeks, Oxford Institute on Methodist Theological Studies, 7 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), pp. 34–52.
8. Outler, ‘A New Future’, p. 38.
9. Outler, ‘A New Future’, p. 39.
10. Outler, ‘A New Future’, p. 39.

The last three uses of Outler should just show Outler, p. 38, etc. without the short title.

Elsewhere in the document, using a different resource, the citations show correctly:

18. Ted A. Campbell, ‘The “Wesleyan Quadrilateral”: The Story of a Methodist Myth’, Methodist History, 29.2 (1991), 87–95 (p. 92).
19. Campbell, p. 93.
20. Campbell, p. 93.
21. Campbell, p. 94.

Any ideas why the Outler piece would be forcing short title?

  • That'd happen if you have another work by Outlet, to distinguish the 2
  • Right. I understand that. However, that would only apply if I had used another Outler piece in between the others, right?

    Since these are the same citation from the same Outler piece in sequence, they should only need to reflect the Last Name and page number. IF another piece from another author, or Outler came into play between them, then the short title would be needed in that instance.

    At least that's the way it's worked in previous papers.
  • @mdsimants : "I understand that. However, that would only apply if I had used another Outler piece in between the others, right?"

    As one who reads lots of papers (and even more reference lists of papers I haven't read), I would always like to see the short title included to disambiguate one from another. I really dislike needing to exert extra effort when I read a bibliography. (op cit and loc cit frustrate me.) All things being equal, make it easier for your readers who are sufficiently interested in your work to care about your sources.

    I've used Zotero for well-over a decade and this has always been so with the MHRA style. I have not used the style (or reviewed the style guide) in many years but the current disambiguation policy seems correct to me.

  • Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is right for MHRA -- I suspect you're remembering Chicago Manual 17th edition, which indeed uses just the author name for immediately subsequent (formerly ibid.) references, and uses author, short title otherwise.
  • edited December 20, 2022
    See the adamsmith post below.
    I commented here about the wrong thing.
    This post is correct for the reference list
    but this thread is NOT about the bibliography
    but about in-text citations.

    Take home point.
    1)The MHRA style guide is freely available:

    2)Zotero is correct

    Okay, I looked this up in my 1978 and 2002 print editions of MHRA style guides and the Zotero interpretation is correct for those. However, the current MHRA style guide is available online and neither the Zotero nor @mdsimants interpretations seem to be correct for sequential references to works by the same author. See:

    11.6 Bibliographies
    "If the list includes more than one work by the same author, a 2-em dash should be substituted for the name after the first appearance..."

    However, pedant (and hoarder) that I am, I also looked at university websites and their interpretations of proper citing of repeated references. Those university requirements don't seem to follow the exact MHRA rules either.
  • No, you're just looking in the wrong place -- this is about citations, not the bibliography (Zotero does do the em dash there).

    For that, 11. 3 applies:
    Sometimes it may be necessary, for example when more than one work by an author has been cited, to repeat a title, in a shortened form:

    McArthur, Worlds of Reference, p. 9.
    I think the current behavior of the style conforms to that.
  • Yes!! I was just about to correct my post. I'll add a correction or cross through.
  • @adamsmith

    Ok, I just did a test in a new document... This is reference one, this is two, etc.

    Your original reply makes sense to me now. When I introduced a second piece by the same author, the short title shows up on all citations using that author.

    While I'm not sure that I like that (as it costs wordcount), but I can follow why it is happening.

    I guess that I'd never noticed this happening that way before. Thanks for chasing it around with me.
Sign In or Register to comment.