Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad

Name: Moqadous Rani

Resgirestion: 17pts04816
Tutor Name:
Course Name: Historical Research Method
Course Code: (5676)
Semester: Autumn
Level: M.A History

Assignment No 2
QuestionNo1
Discuss the methodology used in the evaluation of secondary
sources.
Answer:
An essential component of research is the assessment of secondary sources. In
order to ensure that the research is founded on trustworthy and correct
information, the evaluation of secondary sources is a crucial phase in the
research process.

What are Secondary Sources?

It is crucial to comprehend secondary sources before talking about the approach
utilized to assess them. Information sources known as secondary sources are
those that draw on main sources. Diaries, interviews, and field notes are
examples of primary sources, which are documents that were written at the time
of the event or phenomena being examined. Primary materials, such books,
articles, or reviews, serve as the foundation for secondary sources. Although
secondary sources are not the original sources of knowledge, they can be used to
understand the primary source material more thoroughly.

Methodology for Evaluating Secondary Sources

When examining secondary sources, there are a number of factors to consider.
They include the veracity of the data, the source's applicability to the study
question, its dependability, and the author's credibility. It's critical to examine
the author's language choices in order to gauge the information's accuracy. The
language used should be precise and understandable, and it should be supported
by facts. It's also critical to check the source for any errors or contradictions.

It is crucial to take the source's scope into account when determining how
pertinent it is to the study topic and research question. Also, it's critical to take
into account the context in which the source was created. The source might not
be as pertinent to the current research as it could have been in the past, for
instance, if it was written in a different era.

When assessing secondary sources, it's important to also consider the source's
credibility. Identifying any bias or opinion in the source entails doing this. It is
crucial to confirm the source's objectivity and objectivity. The credibility of the
author and the source should also be taken into account.

The author's reputation should also be taken into consideration. The author
ought to be well-known in the industry and have knowledge of the subject under
investigation.

Examples of Applying the Methodology

Two examples will be given to help the reader comprehend how the methods
covered above can be used in real-world situations. The first illustration is a
review of a book. It's critical to evaluate the veracity of the material in book
reviews. This entails examining the review for any errors or contradictions.
Evaluation of the review's applicability to the research issue is also crucial. In this
instance, the review must concentrate on the book's content and avoid being too
broad. Also, it's critical to check for prejudice and opinions in order to evaluate
the review's dependability. The author's reputation should also be taken into
consideration.

A second illustration is an article. It's critical to evaluate an article's information

accuracy when evaluating it. This entails examining the article for any errors or
contradictions. Evaluation of the article's relevance to the study topic is also
crucial. In this situation, the essay should be narrowly focused on the subject of
the study rather than being unduly broad. Also, it's critical to check the article for
prejudice and opinions in order to determine its credibility. The author's
reputation should also be taken into consideration. The author ought to be well-
known in the industry and have knowledge of the subject under investigation.

Conclusion
In conclusion, assessing secondary sources is a crucial part of conducting
research. In order to ensure that the research is founded on trustworthy and
correct information, the evaluation of secondary sources is a crucial phase in the
research process. The process used to evaluate secondary sources was covered in
this essay. It has detailed the several factors that should be considered when
assessing secondary sources and has given instances of how this evaluation
procedure might be used in real-world situations.

QuestionNo2;
Differentiate between External Criticism and Internal Criticism.
Why both are essential in historical research?
Answer;
External and internal historical data are the two types that can be obtained
through the approach of evaluation from historical data. The goal of external
critique is to guarantee the reliability or legitimacy of the findings. Lower
criticism is frequently used. At every level, historians employ references. The
criteria include usefulness, durability, objectivity, and precision. These decisions
can occasionally be made quickly, for example, by viewing memes.

An historical source's analysis can occasionally be more complex. How did things
used to be is a question that historical analysis poses. While evaluating
documents, primary versus secondary sources and external versus internal
criticism present two major challenges for historical historians.

Internal critique, also known as constructive criticism, is the researcher's attempt

to reclaim the meaning of the text. This is the hermeneutic process when the
scholar engages the context of the text rather than the external characteristics of
the document. Although external critique is a method by which historians
determine a source's veracity in order to determine its credibility. An
authenticated source's credibility is examined internally after being subjected to
external review.

The component of the historical method known as external criticism causes the
veracity of the source to be called into question. The writing resembles an inmate
at a bar in certain ways. Wherever possible, paleographic and diplomatic
scrutiny should be used to verify its authenticity. It must be localized in terms of
time and place. It must be determined if it is still exactly how its creator intended
it to be in its current condition. The learner must determine if it is what it
purports to be or whether it is a fake in order to determine its legitimacy. It's
crucial to consider all interpretations of the document.

Its agreement or disagreement with evidence gathered from other reliable

sources from the same place and time, or on the same topic, would always serve
as a defining characteristic of its legitimacy. The writer's rejection of things that
he claims to be true are other indications of authenticity or its lack. External and
internal historical data are the two types that can be obtained through the
approach of evaluation from historical data. The goal of external critique is to
guarantee the reliability or legitimacy of the findings. Lower criticism is
frequently used.

At every level, historians employ references. The criteria include usefulness,

durability, objectivity, and precision. These decisions can occasionally be made
quickly, for example, by viewing memes. An historical source's analysis can
occasionally be more complex. How did things used to be is a question that
historical analysis poses. While evaluating documents, primary versus secondary
sources and external versus internal criticism present two major challenges for
historical historians. Internal critique, also known as constructive criticism, is the
researcher's attempt to reclaim the meaning of the text. This is the hermeneutic
process when the scholar engages the context of the text rather than the
external characteristics of the document. Although external critique is a method
by which historians determine a source's veracity in order to determine its
credibility.

An authenticated source's credibility is examined internally after being subjected

to external review. The component of the historical method known as external
criticism causes the veracity of the source to be called into question. The writing
resembles an inmate at a bar in certain ways. Wherever possible, paleographic
and diplomatic scrutiny should be used to verify its authenticity. It must be
localized in terms of time and place. It must be determined if it is still exactly how
its creator intended it to be in its current condition. The learner must determine if
it is what it purports to be or whether it is a fake in order to determine its
legitimacy. It's crucial to consider all interpretations of the document.

Its agreement or disagreement with evidence gathered from other reliable

sources from the same place and time, or on the same topic, would always serve
as a defining characteristic of its legitimacy. The writer's rejection of things that
he claims to be true are other indications of authenticity or its lack.
One of a historian's most crucial tasks during research is historical criticism of the
materials. It is a component of the historical method's analytical process. Source
criticism aids the historian in identifying a trustworthy historical record.
Establishing the legitimacy and dependability of a historical record is the goal of
historical critique.

Source criticism can be divided into two categories: external criticism and
internal criticism. The objective of the external criticism is to establish the
document's legitimacy. Internal critique, on the other hand, tries to prove the
document's content's reliability.

Internal critique, also known as higher criticism, is a method of determining

whether or not the information contained in a document is reliable. Its aim is to
determine whether the contents of the document can be trusted. It is concerned
with the veracity of the information. The material is subjected to internal
scrutiny to identify any inaccuracies or fabrications.

The process of reconstructing historical narratives is crucial and important.

Moreover, internal critique, usually referred to as interpretative criticism, is
concerned with the interpretation of the sources. The science of interpretation is
thus known as hermeneutics. Hermeneutics deals with the interior aspects of a
document, while heuristics deals with its exterior aspects.

The process of internal criticism more than anything else calls for a healthy dose
of doubt as well as a critical and analytical mind. When approaching a historical
source, uncertainty is unavoidable. This uncertainty aids the historian in
determining which historical account is the most trustworthy. The researcher is
protected from mistakes by the critical approach. Critical analysis of the
document's substance is necessary. The text has to be broken up into numerous
sections. Each trace is examined and tested independently. To understand the
nature of historical facts and determine their veracity, the critical method should
be used.
The researcher must look at a number of factors to determine whether the
content of a document is credible, including:

• The nature of the document;

• The text's literal and true meaning;

• The author's knowledge.

The following factors must be considered: the author's competence and

dependability; his explanation of his personal connection to the event; his source
of knowledge; the writing environment at the time; his personal bias; the
purposeful and intentional flaws in the document.

• Verifying evidence

Positive and Negative Interpretative Criticism

Internal criticism involves two operations:

1. Positive interpretative criticism

Positive interpretive critique aims to comprehend the text's literal and true
meaning. Words have actual and genuine meanings. The literal meaning of the
phrase is "according to the letter," which is also its grammatical meaning. But
not all uses of words are literal in nature. The word can also be used
metaphorically or figuratively. The importance that the author or witness gives
the word is what gives it its true meaning. As a result, one should read the term
in both letter and spirit. Once more, a people's language never remains stagnant.
Understanding the idioms of the time the document was written was highly
important because they shift from generation to generation.

Understanding the literal meaning of the text requires knowledge of the

language, linguistic usage, writing style, variations in expression, etc. In a similar
vein, the text's true meaning must be found. The hidden meaning must be
distinguished from the true meaning, just like grain is separated from chaff. The
researcher must ascertain the literal meaning of the contents of the under-
review document as well as the true or inner meaning. Internal critique, in other
words, aims to separate the text's true meaning from its literal meaning. Its goal
is to reveal the author's true intentions behind a specific remark.

2. Negative interpretative criticism

Finding the text's element of truth is the goal of the negative interpretive
criticism. Sometimes documents that contradict one another are found by
historians. So, it is vital to disprove claims and facts that are blatantly erroneous
and incorrect. Negative critique is focused with the removal of blatantly false,
false, or falsified statements. It is conceivable for a same statement to contain
both correct and faulty narration as well as true and misleading thoughts.

Mistakes could be unintentional or purposeful. There could be a number of

causes. It's possible that the author is a victim of circumstances. The author
would have written in accordance with social expectations, religious
observances, or political demands, rather than his own convictions. Furthermore,
the author's biases, preferences, and views on certain things or people may have
led them to stray from the truth. Similar to this, accuracy mistakes happen when
the information source is flawed. Although the researcher may be earnest,
truthful, and faithful, the information he obtains may be inaccurate or flawed for
causes beyond of his control. He might spread the rumours in good faith without
being aware that they are untrue. These violations are made because the
historian is not an impartial witness to the events, and must inevitably rely on
hearsay.

QuestionNo3;
Why past is divided into categories? Indicate some of the
problems historians face in its categorization.
Answer;
For the purpose of easier comprehension of the significance and developments of
each period, historians divide the history into study able periods. By separating
the past into extensive chunks and periods that share certain traits, studying
time is made slightly simpler. British historians classified Indian history into three
eras at the middle of the 19th century: Hindu, Muslim, and British. Instead of the
significance of historical changes and progress that each time contained, the split
was made based on a religious basis. Such divides also downplay the
subcontinent's vast diversity. Several historians use the same per iodization for
India today, while others classify the key components of various historical
developments using economic and social aspects.

The history is further separated into the mediaeval and modern eras, which
include towns, villages, kingdoms, empires, peasant societies, and imperial state
forms. Modernism was defined as the social growth that mediaeval culture
lacked in terms of both material progress and intellectual development. The rise
of Hinduism and Islam as well as the entry of European trading companies were
significant milestones in India.

The fact that history is constantly changing is what causes historians trouble.
Indian history was altered by the emergence of European trading businesses and
other events. India has been ruled by numerous dynasties over the years, and
each one left behind its own unique economic, social, and cultural legacy.

The past is broken up into longer periods of time termed "periods" in order to
make sense of it. Each of these "periods" can be further divided into smaller
periods of time called "ages" and even smaller periods of time called "eras."

The past is broken up into longer periods of time termed "periods" in order to
make sense of it. Each of these "periods" can be further divided into smaller
periods of time called "ages" and even smaller periods of time called "eras."

Ti 2100 - 1550 Ages Eras Approximate

period Years
 Stone Paleolithic c. 2,500,000 - 6000
Age BC

Pre-History
(The time before Mesolithic 6000 - 4000 BC
humans had
developed
writing) Neolithic 4000 - 3000 BC

Bronze 3000 - 2100 BC

Age Early Bronze Age

Middle Bronze 2100 - 1550 BC

Age

Late Bronze

Iron Age Iron Age 1200 - 800 BC

History Greek Era

Classical 800 - 400 BC
(From the time Age
humans began Macedonian Era 400 - 300 BC
writing until now)

Hellenistic Era 300 - 146 BC

Roman Era 146 BC - AD 476
 Middle Early Middle Ages AD 476 - 1000
Ages

High AD 1000 - 1300

Ages

Late Middle Ages AD 1300 - 1400

Modern The Renaissance

Age AD 1450 - 1600

Age of Discovery

Industrial AD 1750-1900

Revolution
AD 1900 - Present
Modern Era Day

QuestionNo4;
List some of the considerations a researcher must be cautious
while taking notes from sources.
Answer:
The APA's Science Directorate offers the following five suggestions to assist
researchers in avoiding moral conundrums:

1. Discuss intellectual property frankly

When it comes to authorship credit, academia's competitive "publish or perish"
mentality can be a recipe for trouble. Although though many people frequently
feel awkward about such matters, discussing these problems at the outset of a
professional relationship is the greatest approach to prevent arguments about
who should get credit and in what order.

According to Tangney, "it's almost like talking about money." "They don't want
to come across as avaricious or arrogant."

The APA's Ethical Code provides some direction: Faculty advisers must "address
publication credit with students as early as practical and throughout the research
and publishing process as appropriate," according to the policy. Researchers and
students have a useful tool to continuously discuss and evaluate contributions as
the research proceeds when they put such understandings in writing.

Even the best laid plans, though, often go awry because different people have
different perspectives on the same circumstances. According to Stephen Behnke,
JD, PhD, director of the APA Ethics Office, "authorship should represent the
contribution, but social science research has shown that people frequently
overvalue their contributions to a project. It occurs frequently in instances
involving authorship. Often times, both sides firmly believe they are in the right.
According to the APA's Ethical Code, psychologists may only claim credit for work
that they really completed or to which they made a significant contribution, and
published credit should fairly represent these contributions: According to the
code, "Mere holding of an institutional post, such as department head, does not
justify authorship credit." Small contributions to the writing or the research
“Small contributions to the study or to publication writing are duly
acknowledged, such as in footnotes or in an introductory comment," the
statement reads.

Students must follow the same guidelines. They should be listed as authors if
they made a significant contribution to the conceptualization, design,
implementation, analysis, or interpretation of the research reported. The
majority of the technical contributions are not worthy of authorship. In a similar
spirit, mentors shouldn't demand ex-officio authorship on their students'
assignments.

According to Matthew McGee, PhD, the psychology department at the University

of Minnesota has implemented a system to prevent ambiguous authorship
difficulties. Students submit ideas for anything they undertake on the project
according to a rigorous framework in place, he says. Students and teachers can
more easily discuss research responsibility, dissemination, and authorship thanks
to the procedure.

Psychologists should also be aware of circumstances where they have access to

sensitive information, such as when they are examining research proposals for
funding or journal articles, or when they are hearing novel concepts during a
presentation or casual discussion. While it's rare that reviewers will be able to
completely erase an intriguing manuscript's contents from their minds, it's
nevertheless immoral to use such concepts without providing due credit to the
author.

"You owe that person a duty of confidentiality and anonymity," says Gerald P.
Kocher, PhD, editor of the journal Ethics and Behavior and co-author of "Ethics in
Psychology: Professional Standards and Cases," if you are a grant or journal
manuscript reviewer and you come across someone's unpublished research
(Oxford University Press, 1998).

Once their work is published, researchers must adhere to their ethical duties.
Authors are morally required to swiftly fix errors in a correction, retraction,
erratum, or by other methods if they become aware of inaccuracies that alter the
interpretation of research findings.

According to University of Minnesota psychologist and researcher Matthew

McGue, PhD, writers should archive main data and related records for at least
five years in order to be able to respond to inquiries concerning the validity of the
study and allow others to reanalyze the findings. "Save all of your info. Don't ruin
it, he commands. "So you can go back if someone accuses you of doing
something wrong."

According to Susan Knapp, the deputy publisher of APA, "It appears

straightforward, but this can be a tough subject." The Publication Manual Part of
the APA General recommendations on what to save and ideas on factors to take
into account when sharing data are provided in Section 8.05 of the APA
Publication Manual.

According to the APA Ethics Code, psychologists must make their data available
to those who wish to independently verify their findings, as long as participant
confidentiality can be maintained and there are no legal restrictions on the
distribution of private data. The law also specifies, however, that psychologists
who make such requests for data may only use the shared data for reanalysis; for
any other use, they must first get a written authorization.

2. Be conscious of multiple roles

According to the APA's Ethical Code, psychologists should stay away from
partnerships that could potentially damage or exploit others or reasonably affect
their professional performance. Yet, it also makes the point that a variety of
various partnerships are not necessarily unethical, provided that no unfavorable
consequences are foreseeable.

Notwithstanding this, psychologists should exercise caution when establishing

numerous relationships with any individual or group, such as by enlisting
students or clients as participants in research projects or evaluating the efficacy
of a product manufactured by a firm in which they hold shares.

For instance, be sure to make it clear that participation is voluntary when inviting
students from your Psychology 101 class to take part in an experiment. Ensure
that involvement has educational value by, for example, giving a full debriefing
to improve students' grasp of the subject, if participation is a requirement for the
course, making sure to indicate that in the curriculum for the class. Guideline
8.04b of the 2002 Ethics Code stipulates that students must be offered fair
choices to engage in research.

Being a mentor and lab supervisor for students who they also teach in class is
maybe one of the several tasks that researchers play most frequently. Experts
advise psychologists to exercise extra caution to avoid abusing their position of
authority over students. For instance, they shouldn't use their influence as
instructors to force students to perform extra research.

When supervision or mentoring begins, both sides can prevent misconceptions by

describing the nature and structure of the supervisory relationship, according to
Tangney of George Mason University. It is beneficial to draught a written
contract that outlines parties’ obligations as well as authorship issues, the level
of monitoring, and other important employment requirements.

Although that's the ideal scenario, she observes, "in practice we do a lot less of
that than we ought to." "Part of it is not anticipating how a project or research
study is going to unfold up front," says the author.

Because of this, experts advise that supervisors establish prompt and precise
procedures for providing feedback to students and maintain records of their
supervision, including meeting dates and times, topics covered, and tasks
assigned.

If psychologists do discover that they are involved in numerous potentially

hazardous relationships, they are morally required to act to end them while
upholding the Ethics Code and acting in the person's or group's best interests.

3. Follow informed-consent rules

When carried out properly, the consent procedure guarantees that subjects are
willingly taking part in the research and are fully aware of any relevant risks and
benefits.
According to Kocher, head of Simmons College's Department for Health Studies,
"the federal criterion is that the person must have all of the information that can
reasonably influence their willingness to engage in a form that they can
understand and appreciate."

According to the APA's Ethical Code, psychologists who perform study must
provide participants with information on:

• The goal, timeline, and procedures for the research.

• The rights of participants to refuse participation and to withdraw from the

research after it has begun, as well as the expected effects of doing so.

• Any potential research advantages;

• Reasonably foreseeable issues that may have an impact on participants'

willingness to engage, such as risks, discomfort, or negative impacts.

• Confidentiality's limitations, including data coding, destruction, sharing, and

archiving, as well as when it must be broken.

• Participation incentives.

• Who participants can speak with if they have any inquiries.

Also, experts advise mentioning the possibility, size, and duration of any
potential risks or benefits, stressing that participation is optional, and going over
treatment options, if applicable to the study.

Bear in mind that the Ethics Code has special requirements for scientists
conducting studies on experimental treatments. They must specifically inform
people about the treatment's experimental nature, the services that will or won't
be provided to the control groups, how participants will be assigned to treatment
and control groups, the range of treatment options available, and compensation
or financial costs associated with participation.

According to Kocher, if study subjects or clients lack the capacity to weigh the
risks and rewards of involvement on their own, such as children or those with
cognitive disorders, the person giving consent must have access to the same
information.

Ethics experts advise keeping in mind that just because a consent form has been
signed, the informing procedure cannot be skipped. In fact, the APA Ethics Code
states that psychologists may forego informed consent only in the following two
situations: When required by law, government or institutional laws, or where the
research involves one of the following and it is not reasonably anticipated that it
may distress or injure participants.

• Anonymous questionnaires, naturalistic observations, or archival research for

which confidentiality is protected and disclosure of results would not subject
participants to risk of criminal or civil liability or harm their financial situation,
ability to find employment, or reputation.

• A study of organizational or job effectiveness elements carried out in

circumstances where confidentiality is maintained and participants'
employability is not at stake.

Experts advise psychologists to make sure to offer a full debriefing after data
collection and give people the chance to reiterate their consent if they are unable
to obtain full consent at the beginning of the study, for instance if the protocol
involves deception, recording spontaneous behavior, or the use of a confederate.

Also, according to the policy, psychologists should take reasonable precautions

to refrain from providing "excessive or inappropriate money or other
inducements for research involvement when such inducements are likely to
coerce participation."

4. Respect confidentiality and privacy

Every psychologist's work is based on the principle that everyone has the right to
privacy and secrecy. However, Susan Folkman, PhD, notes in "Ethics in Research
with Human Subjects" that many privacy issues are specific to the research
population (APA, 2000). For instance, experts advise that researchers should
think of ways to ask participants if they are willing to discuss difficult subjects
without putting them in unpleasant situations. That can entail offering a series of
in-depth interview questions so that participants can pause if they begin to feel
uncomfortable.

Sanpete Panicked, PhD, director of the APA Science Directorate's Research Ethics
Office, advises psychologists to exercise caution when recruiting participants for
a study because research subjects have the freedom to decide how much
information about themselves they will reveal and under what circumstances.
For instance, contacting members of a support group to ask them to participate
in research is not suitable. However, you might offer a letter outlining your
research study and a mechanism for people to get in touch with you if they're
interested to your colleague who runs the group for distribution.

Researchers should also take the following actions:

• Go over the boundaries of privacy. Secure the participants' consent by

providing them with information about how their data will be used and what will
happen to case materials, images, and audio and video recordings.

• Know both state and federal law. Understand the nuances of any state and
federal laws that might be relevant to your research. For instance, without
parental consent, it is against the Objectives 2000: Education Act of 1994 to
inquire about a child's religion, sex, or family life.

Another illustration is that some laws require researchers to report abuse and
neglect, even though most jurisdictions only require licensed psychologists to
comply with obligatory reporting legislation. Because of this, it's critical for
researchers to prepare for scenarios in which they might become aware of such
reportable infractions. Typically, research psychologists can discuss the best
course of action with a therapist or the legal team at their institution.
• Implement sensible security measures. Make sure sensitive
documents are kept in a safe location with restricted access and, if practical,
think about stripping them of identifying information. Likewise, be wary of
circumstances where confidentiality could unintentionally be violated, such
having private discussions in an unsound proof room or listing participants'
identities on invoices paid by accounting departments.

• When beginning a research project, consider data exchange.

Researchers should clarify in the permission procedure how they will share their
data with others and whether it will be anonymous if they want to do so. For
instance, if participants were not asked for consent to share sensitive data,
researchers studying persons with severe mental problems may find it difficult to
share the information. Perhaps videotaped developmental data may be a useful
resource for sharing, but doing so would be unethical back then unless the
researcher first obtained consent. When sharing, psychologists should, whenever
possible, protect confidentiality by following accepted practices, such as
encrypting data to conceal identities. Yet understand that it might be extremely
impossible to completely conceal identification, particularly if your data can be
linked to larger databases or include video or audio recordings, claims Merry
Bullock, PhD, associate executive director of the APA's Scientific Directorate.

• Recognize the Internet's limitations. Psychologists must be

technologically adept to conduct research online and cautious when exchanging
confidential information electronically because Web technology is constantly
changing. Get assistance from someone who is an Internet whiz if you're not one.
If not, it might be feasible for someone else to access data that you believed to
be well protected.

5. Tap into ethics resources

Knowing their ethical responsibilities and the resources at their disposal is one of
the best strategies for researchers to avoid and overcome ethical problems.

According to Bullock, researchers might assist themselves in bringing up ethical

difficulties by reminding themselves of the fundamental principles guiding both
research and professional ethics. These fundamentals include:
• The report from Belmont. The National Committee for the Protection of
Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research issued a report in 1979
that served as the moral foundation for rules on the use of human subjects in
research and now forms the basis for legislation protecting such subjects (see
Further Reading).

QuestionNo5;
Elaborate main rules for the preparation of Bibliography in
research.
Answer:
A bibliography is, to put it simply, a list of the sources you used to write your
paper. It contains every textual source that was used to create your paper. Here's
where things start to get tricky. Not every citation page contains a bibliography.
Indeed, there are three distinct categories of citation sites.

• Works Cited: This section contains a list of all the written sources that were
cited or used in the essay. In MLA format, a works cited page is typically used.

• Reference List: This will include a list of all the sources used in the essay,
similar to a works cited page. A reference list is required by APA style.

• Bibliography: This citation page lists all of the sources that were used to create
the item. A bibliography is used in Chicago and Turban formats.

Preparing Your Citation Page

No matter what style you choose, you must include a citation page. Not all of
them will be referred to as bibliographies, but they will still be present. There are
several standard bibliography guidelines that you should adhere to.

• Begin on a different page. If applicable, your endnotes will come after this.

• Place the page's title in the centre.

• Sort the authors' names alphabetically.

Align the citations to the left.

Modern Language Association (MLA)

MLA is a writing format for authors in the humanities or the arts and is named
after the Modern Language Association. For MLA, author-page citations are
required in-text. As a result, you'll normally list the author and the page where
the information is located at the end of the sentence. Readers can then locate
the reference on your works cited page with the aid of the author's name.

The broad works stated example rules are broken down as follows:

• Put "Works Cited" in the title.

• Entries with two spaces between them but no additional line breaks.

• Inverted complete names of the author (e.g., Smith, John Bert).

• Make all title words in capital letters (e.g., The Hunger Games).

Put titles in italics.

Put a period at the end of each citation.

• When there are numerous writers, use "and."

American Psychological Association (APA)

APA is the citation format you should use if your lecturer wants it or if your
article is based in the social sciences. The American Psychological Association
gave rise to the APA style, which employs an author-date format for in-text
citations. In most cases, these citations will appear at the end of a sentence in
the text. The references page will then provide more information about these
citations.

The following general guidelines should be followed when creating your

reference page:
Use the heading "References."

• Leave two spaces between paragraphs.

• Reverse the author names (e.g., Smith, J. B.).

• For an author's first and middle names, simply use the initial.

• In titles, simply capitalize the first word (e.g., the hunger games).

• Make all capital letters in journal titles.

Titles of longer works, such as books and periodicals, should be italicized.

• When there are several writers, use an ampersand.

Chicago/Turbans Style
A professional writing style known as Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) makes use
of endnotes, bibliographies, and author-date references. Whether or not your
paper is intended for publication will determine which style you should use.
Turbans are a student edition of the Chicago Manual of Style as well. It is used
for student writing that isn't intended for publication and isn't done
professionally.

Following general guidelines can help you create a citation page:

• As necessary, use the heading "References" or "Bibliography."

• Text is double spaced.

• The title and the first entry should be separated by two blank lines.

• Space out entries by one line.

• Reverse the authors' last names (e.g., Gambian, Giorgio).

• Capitalize titles in the manner of headlines.

• Depending on the font, italicize or quote titles.

Put "and" between the names of the authors.