Bibtex is inverting two reference from same author in the same year
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
The following is the relevant lines from the the main tex file:
usepackage[round]{natbib}
begin{document}
bibliography{References/references}
bibliographystyle{apa}
end{document}
And I have two references inside the bibtex file, from the same author and published in the same year:
@article{Author2011a,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
@article{Author2011b,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
The problem is when generating the *.bbl file with the bibtex command, the place in the document referencing citep{Author2011a} shows (Author2011b), and vice versa for the other reference. Same thing inside the *.bbl file.
Anybody knows what can cause this kind of problems?
bibtex
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
The following is the relevant lines from the the main tex file:
usepackage[round]{natbib}
begin{document}
bibliography{References/references}
bibliographystyle{apa}
end{document}
And I have two references inside the bibtex file, from the same author and published in the same year:
@article{Author2011a,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
@article{Author2011b,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
The problem is when generating the *.bbl file with the bibtex command, the place in the document referencing citep{Author2011a} shows (Author2011b), and vice versa for the other reference. Same thing inside the *.bbl file.
Anybody knows what can cause this kind of problems?
bibtex
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
2
The key which you give to your bib entry is arbitrary (as long as unique). BibTeX will then sort the entries by it's internal criteria, according to the style you use, then output the "extradate" information.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 19:23
How can I differentiate between them, if not with the key? It doesn't make sense when the reference is shown asAuthor2011abut points toAuthor2011bwhen clicked on. I tried the solution found here, with adding an invisible command to the title, but it didn't fix it.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 19:38
1
The key identifies each entry, and they must be different. The "a"/"b" part on the label date is generated by the style, usually by some secondary sorting criterium (e.g. the title). But the style does associate each entry with a single label as output: the citation "Author (2011a)" will correspond to the entry "Author (2011a)" in your bibliography, even when the entry key in your bib file is "Author2011b".
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 20:00
I see. So swapping the keys will fix this. I was confused because I was expecting bibtex to respect the order of referencing as it would do in an IEEE paper.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 20:58
1
No, the message is that the key you put in your bib file is only important to correctly identify it in the citation. It doesn't matter whether the "a" in your bib file matches the "a" in the citation output. As long as you use a key and are consistent in it's use, the output by the style will be consistent too. In other words, there's really nothing to fix.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 21:05
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
The following is the relevant lines from the the main tex file:
usepackage[round]{natbib}
begin{document}
bibliography{References/references}
bibliographystyle{apa}
end{document}
And I have two references inside the bibtex file, from the same author and published in the same year:
@article{Author2011a,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
@article{Author2011b,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
The problem is when generating the *.bbl file with the bibtex command, the place in the document referencing citep{Author2011a} shows (Author2011b), and vice versa for the other reference. Same thing inside the *.bbl file.
Anybody knows what can cause this kind of problems?
bibtex
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
The following is the relevant lines from the the main tex file:
usepackage[round]{natbib}
begin{document}
bibliography{References/references}
bibliographystyle{apa}
end{document}
And I have two references inside the bibtex file, from the same author and published in the same year:
@article{Author2011a,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
@article{Author2011b,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}}
year = {2011}
}
The problem is when generating the *.bbl file with the bibtex command, the place in the document referencing citep{Author2011a} shows (Author2011b), and vice versa for the other reference. Same thing inside the *.bbl file.
Anybody knows what can cause this kind of problems?
bibtex
bibtex
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
asked Nov 28 at 19:21
Hakim
17318
17318
2
The key which you give to your bib entry is arbitrary (as long as unique). BibTeX will then sort the entries by it's internal criteria, according to the style you use, then output the "extradate" information.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 19:23
How can I differentiate between them, if not with the key? It doesn't make sense when the reference is shown asAuthor2011abut points toAuthor2011bwhen clicked on. I tried the solution found here, with adding an invisible command to the title, but it didn't fix it.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 19:38
1
The key identifies each entry, and they must be different. The "a"/"b" part on the label date is generated by the style, usually by some secondary sorting criterium (e.g. the title). But the style does associate each entry with a single label as output: the citation "Author (2011a)" will correspond to the entry "Author (2011a)" in your bibliography, even when the entry key in your bib file is "Author2011b".
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 20:00
I see. So swapping the keys will fix this. I was confused because I was expecting bibtex to respect the order of referencing as it would do in an IEEE paper.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 20:58
1
No, the message is that the key you put in your bib file is only important to correctly identify it in the citation. It doesn't matter whether the "a" in your bib file matches the "a" in the citation output. As long as you use a key and are consistent in it's use, the output by the style will be consistent too. In other words, there's really nothing to fix.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 21:05
add a comment |
2
The key which you give to your bib entry is arbitrary (as long as unique). BibTeX will then sort the entries by it's internal criteria, according to the style you use, then output the "extradate" information.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 19:23
How can I differentiate between them, if not with the key? It doesn't make sense when the reference is shown asAuthor2011abut points toAuthor2011bwhen clicked on. I tried the solution found here, with adding an invisible command to the title, but it didn't fix it.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 19:38
1
The key identifies each entry, and they must be different. The "a"/"b" part on the label date is generated by the style, usually by some secondary sorting criterium (e.g. the title). But the style does associate each entry with a single label as output: the citation "Author (2011a)" will correspond to the entry "Author (2011a)" in your bibliography, even when the entry key in your bib file is "Author2011b".
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 20:00
I see. So swapping the keys will fix this. I was confused because I was expecting bibtex to respect the order of referencing as it would do in an IEEE paper.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 20:58
1
No, the message is that the key you put in your bib file is only important to correctly identify it in the citation. It doesn't matter whether the "a" in your bib file matches the "a" in the citation output. As long as you use a key and are consistent in it's use, the output by the style will be consistent too. In other words, there's really nothing to fix.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 21:05
2
2
The key which you give to your bib entry is arbitrary (as long as unique). BibTeX will then sort the entries by it's internal criteria, according to the style you use, then output the "extradate" information.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 19:23
The key which you give to your bib entry is arbitrary (as long as unique). BibTeX will then sort the entries by it's internal criteria, according to the style you use, then output the "extradate" information.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 19:23
How can I differentiate between them, if not with the key? It doesn't make sense when the reference is shown as
Author2011a but points to Author2011b when clicked on. I tried the solution found here, with adding an invisible command to the title, but it didn't fix it.– Hakim
Nov 28 at 19:38
How can I differentiate between them, if not with the key? It doesn't make sense when the reference is shown as
Author2011a but points to Author2011b when clicked on. I tried the solution found here, with adding an invisible command to the title, but it didn't fix it.– Hakim
Nov 28 at 19:38
1
1
The key identifies each entry, and they must be different. The "a"/"b" part on the label date is generated by the style, usually by some secondary sorting criterium (e.g. the title). But the style does associate each entry with a single label as output: the citation "Author (2011a)" will correspond to the entry "Author (2011a)" in your bibliography, even when the entry key in your bib file is "Author2011b".
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 20:00
The key identifies each entry, and they must be different. The "a"/"b" part on the label date is generated by the style, usually by some secondary sorting criterium (e.g. the title). But the style does associate each entry with a single label as output: the citation "Author (2011a)" will correspond to the entry "Author (2011a)" in your bibliography, even when the entry key in your bib file is "Author2011b".
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 20:00
I see. So swapping the keys will fix this. I was confused because I was expecting bibtex to respect the order of referencing as it would do in an IEEE paper.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 20:58
I see. So swapping the keys will fix this. I was confused because I was expecting bibtex to respect the order of referencing as it would do in an IEEE paper.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 20:58
1
1
No, the message is that the key you put in your bib file is only important to correctly identify it in the citation. It doesn't matter whether the "a" in your bib file matches the "a" in the citation output. As long as you use a key and are consistent in it's use, the output by the style will be consistent too. In other words, there's really nothing to fix.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 21:05
No, the message is that the key you put in your bib file is only important to correctly identify it in the citation. It doesn't matter whether the "a" in your bib file matches the "a" in the citation output. As long as you use a key and are consistent in it's use, the output by the style will be consistent too. In other words, there's really nothing to fix.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 21:05
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Well, first there are some missing comas in your bib file and some missing journals too ... In the following MWE I added both ...
Second I changed your used keys in the bib file to Author2011one and Author2011two.
Now you can see that the printed (2011a) and (2011b) in the bibliography are created independent from your given keys in the bib file. If you have two same entrys the bibliography needs to change the printed reference to "used year" + "a" or "used year" + "b" depending on the number of same titles ...
The following MWE
RequirePackage{filecontents}
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@article{Author2011one,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
@article{Author2011two,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
end{filecontents}
documentclass[letterpaper, 10pt]{article}
usepackage[round]{natbib}
usepackage{lipsum}
begin{document}
lipsum[1-3] citep{Author2011two}
nocite{*}
bibliographystyle{apa}
bibliography{jobname}
end{document}
gives you:
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Swapping the two keys fixed that problem. The resulting reference is consistent with what was generated by bibtex.
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Well, first there are some missing comas in your bib file and some missing journals too ... In the following MWE I added both ...
Second I changed your used keys in the bib file to Author2011one and Author2011two.
Now you can see that the printed (2011a) and (2011b) in the bibliography are created independent from your given keys in the bib file. If you have two same entrys the bibliography needs to change the printed reference to "used year" + "a" or "used year" + "b" depending on the number of same titles ...
The following MWE
RequirePackage{filecontents}
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@article{Author2011one,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
@article{Author2011two,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
end{filecontents}
documentclass[letterpaper, 10pt]{article}
usepackage[round]{natbib}
usepackage{lipsum}
begin{document}
lipsum[1-3] citep{Author2011two}
nocite{*}
bibliographystyle{apa}
bibliography{jobname}
end{document}
gives you:
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Well, first there are some missing comas in your bib file and some missing journals too ... In the following MWE I added both ...
Second I changed your used keys in the bib file to Author2011one and Author2011two.
Now you can see that the printed (2011a) and (2011b) in the bibliography are created independent from your given keys in the bib file. If you have two same entrys the bibliography needs to change the printed reference to "used year" + "a" or "used year" + "b" depending on the number of same titles ...
The following MWE
RequirePackage{filecontents}
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@article{Author2011one,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
@article{Author2011two,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
end{filecontents}
documentclass[letterpaper, 10pt]{article}
usepackage[round]{natbib}
usepackage{lipsum}
begin{document}
lipsum[1-3] citep{Author2011two}
nocite{*}
bibliographystyle{apa}
bibliography{jobname}
end{document}
gives you:
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Well, first there are some missing comas in your bib file and some missing journals too ... In the following MWE I added both ...
Second I changed your used keys in the bib file to Author2011one and Author2011two.
Now you can see that the printed (2011a) and (2011b) in the bibliography are created independent from your given keys in the bib file. If you have two same entrys the bibliography needs to change the printed reference to "used year" + "a" or "used year" + "b" depending on the number of same titles ...
The following MWE
RequirePackage{filecontents}
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@article{Author2011one,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
@article{Author2011two,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
end{filecontents}
documentclass[letterpaper, 10pt]{article}
usepackage[round]{natbib}
usepackage{lipsum}
begin{document}
lipsum[1-3] citep{Author2011two}
nocite{*}
bibliographystyle{apa}
bibliography{jobname}
end{document}
gives you:
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
Well, first there are some missing comas in your bib file and some missing journals too ... In the following MWE I added both ...
Second I changed your used keys in the bib file to Author2011one and Author2011two.
Now you can see that the printed (2011a) and (2011b) in the bibliography are created independent from your given keys in the bib file. If you have two same entrys the bibliography needs to change the printed reference to "used year" + "a" or "used year" + "b" depending on the number of same titles ...
The following MWE
RequirePackage{filecontents}
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@article{Author2011one,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
@article{Author2011two,
author = {Author},
title = {{Title}},
journal = {missing},
year = {2011},
}
end{filecontents}
documentclass[letterpaper, 10pt]{article}
usepackage[round]{natbib}
usepackage{lipsum}
begin{document}
lipsum[1-3] citep{Author2011two}
nocite{*}
bibliographystyle{apa}
bibliography{jobname}
end{document}
gives you:
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
answered Nov 28 at 21:49
Kurt
34.5k846157
34.5k846157
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
add a comment |
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
As mentioned in the comments I only had to swap the two keys to make them consistent with those generated by bibtex. Your solution looks valid as well.
– Hakim
Nov 29 at 12:11
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Swapping the two keys fixed that problem. The resulting reference is consistent with what was generated by bibtex.
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Swapping the two keys fixed that problem. The resulting reference is consistent with what was generated by bibtex.
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Swapping the two keys fixed that problem. The resulting reference is consistent with what was generated by bibtex.
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
Swapping the two keys fixed that problem. The resulting reference is consistent with what was generated by bibtex.
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
answered Nov 29 at 12:12
Hakim
17318
17318
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f462234%2fbibtex-is-inverting-two-reference-from-same-author-in-the-same-year%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
The key which you give to your bib entry is arbitrary (as long as unique). BibTeX will then sort the entries by it's internal criteria, according to the style you use, then output the "extradate" information.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 19:23
How can I differentiate between them, if not with the key? It doesn't make sense when the reference is shown as
Author2011abut points toAuthor2011bwhen clicked on. I tried the solution found here, with adding an invisible command to the title, but it didn't fix it.– Hakim
Nov 28 at 19:38
1
The key identifies each entry, and they must be different. The "a"/"b" part on the label date is generated by the style, usually by some secondary sorting criterium (e.g. the title). But the style does associate each entry with a single label as output: the citation "Author (2011a)" will correspond to the entry "Author (2011a)" in your bibliography, even when the entry key in your bib file is "Author2011b".
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 20:00
I see. So swapping the keys will fix this. I was confused because I was expecting bibtex to respect the order of referencing as it would do in an IEEE paper.
– Hakim
Nov 28 at 20:58
1
No, the message is that the key you put in your bib file is only important to correctly identify it in the citation. It doesn't matter whether the "a" in your bib file matches the "a" in the citation output. As long as you use a key and are consistent in it's use, the output by the style will be consistent too. In other words, there's really nothing to fix.
– gusbrs
Nov 28 at 21:05