Style Guidance from American Psychological Association

Question

I've recently learned that the American Psychological Association publishes style-guidance works. The home page for that topic is http://www.apastyle.org/ , and they have some useful style information on line at
http://www.apastyle.org/previoustips.html .
I especially like the latter source because it agrees in general with the things I've said here about hyphenation.

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]I've recently learned that the American Psychological Association publishes style-guidance works. The home page for that topic is http://www.apastyle.org/ , ... . I especially like the latter source because it agrees in general with the things I've said here about hyphenation.[/nq]
Yes, but some of the rest of it is pretty out-there.

This, for example, is from their guidance on avoiding heterosexual bias in language (hi RF!):
PROBLEMATIC: Subjects were asked about their homosexuality. PREFERRED: Subjects were asked about the experience of being a lesbian or a gay man.
Comment: Changes sentence construction to avoid use of the term "homosexuality".
Why use one word when nine will do?
"Homosexuality" is a no-no for the APA because "(h)istorically, the term 'homosexuality' has connoted sexual activity rather than a general way of relating and living." What counts, apparently, is not whether you prefer genitals of the same or a different ilk, but how many Liza Minelli CDs you've got in your collection. Historically, that is.
I'm tempted to write to them to suggest that, for the sake of consistency, the title of the section that this gem appears in "Avoiding Heterosexual Bias in Language" should be retitled "Avoiding Bias from the Perspective of the Experience Being Straight People in Language".
**
Ross Howard

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I've recently learned that the American Psychological Association publishes style-guidance ... in general with the things I've said here about hyphenation.[/nq]
[nq:1]Yes, but some of the rest of it is pretty out-there. This, for example, is from their guidance on avoiding ... Bias in Language" should be retitled "Avoiding Bias from the Perspective of the Experience Being Straight People in Language".[/nq]
A minor correction to the above a missing word, as usual; insert "of" before "Experience" gives me an excuse to add a couple of other bits of weirdness from the same section:
Referring to lesbians, gay men, and bisexual persons

For the sake of being concise a major aim in most style guides shouldn't that be just "and bisexuals"? Surely it was nouned long before "gay" came into common currency.
And finally (for now, anyway when I get more time I'll explore the site in more depth; it's a potential gold mine):
Using sexual terminology that is relevant to lesbians and gay men as well as bisexual and heterosexual people (e.g., "when did you first engage in sexual activity?" rather than "when did you first have sexual intercourse?").
Point taken about "intercourse" implicity denoting heterosexual penetration, but are they really suggesting that "engage in sexual activity" is a better way to communicate with research subjects rather than other physchologists than the now-virtually-universal "have ***"?
**
Ross Howard

Usenet · Answer

Thus spake Ross Howard:
[nq:1]And finally (for now, anyway when I get more time I'll explore the site in more depth; it's a ... is a better way to communicate with research subjects rather than other physchologists than the now-virtually-universal "have ***"?[/nq]
Surely even lesbian *** (the least penetrative of any variey except cybersex) can be termed sexual intercourse: something (communication, love, ****, whatever) is running (currere) between (inter) the parties.
Or have we lost that word, too?

Simon R. Hughes

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I've recently learned that the American Psychological Association publishes style-guidance works. The home page for that topic is http://www.apastyle.org/ , ... . I especially like the latter source because it agrees in general with the things I've said here about hyphenation.[/nq]
So let's see what it has to say about hyphenation, then.

General Principle 1
Do not use a hyphen unless it serves a purpose. If a compound adjective cannot be misread or, as with many psychological terms, its meaning is established, a hyphen is not necessary.

I maybe a quarter-agree with this. If the meaning and unhyphenated usage of a technical term are well established, I cannot argue. However, I disagree with the implication that the purpose of a hyphen should be to prevent misreading in particular cases. I say that compound modifiers should be generally hyphenated rather than generally not. For one thing, the writer may err in deciding that there is no ambiguity, and for another, his opinion whether or not there is ambiguity is of no interest to me as a reader.

For example
covert learning techniques
Learning-techniques that are covert, I'm guessing. But if I meant techniques for covert learning, I'd write 'covert-learning techniques'.
health care reform
Health-care reform, on two non-ambiguity-related counts ('health care' by itself would be 'health-care', or even 'healthcare', in my book).

day treatment program
A treatment-program that is administered during the day? Otherwise 'day-treatment program'.
*** role differences
I wouldn't withhold a hyphen just because I failed to come up with a plausible scenario for role-differences that have to do with ***. I say use a hyphen.
grade point average
grade-point average
General Principle 2
In a temporary compound that is used as an adjective before a noun, use a hyphen if the term can be misread or if the term expresses a single thought (i.e., all words together modify the noun).
What a complicated general principle! This for me would be subsumed with General Principle 1 into a single principle: Use hyphens with compound modifiers. There's no need to concern oneself with whether the compound is temporary or whether the term can be misread. One simple rule covers all.
For example:
"the adolescents resided in two parent homes" means that two homes served as residences,
For that meaning, I'd write 'two parental homes'.
whereas if the adolescents resided
in "two-parent homes," they each would live in a household headed by two parents.
A properly placed hyphen helps the reader understand the intended meaning.
A hyphen helps the reader understand the intended meaning whether or not there happens to be a lack of ambiguity.
Also use hyphens for compounds in which the base word is capitalized: pro-Freudian
Yes, though I can see that hyphen disappearing.
a number: post-1970
Yup.
an abbreviation: pre-UCS trial
Yup.
more than one word: non-achievement-oriented students

Yup.
All "self-" compounds whether they are adjectives or nouns

self-report
self-esteem
the test was self-paced
I wonder how ?unselfconscious' should be written.
Words that could be misunderstood
re-pair (pair again)
re-form (form again)
un-ionized
'Re-pair' is so obviously open to misinterpretation that I honestly don't think I'd use it. As to ?un-ionized', if the context is clearly chemical, misinterpretation is hardly possible.
Words in which the prefix ends and the base word begins with the same vowel
meta-analysis
anti-intellectual
co-occur
Personally, I'd use the unhyphenated forms (as cooperate, coordinate), with a preference for diaeresis if a mark is needed.

General Principle 3
Most compound adjective rules are applicable only when the compound adjective precedes the term it modifies. If a compound adjective follows the term, do not use a hyphen, because relationships are sufficiently clear without one.
Well, I'm only up to one general principle so far. My General Principle 2 would be 'Use a hyphen with a compound adjective' (irrespective of its position in the sentence). However, I wouldn't call a string of words a true compound adjective if the first element is not stressed. The hyphen indicates a close association between the elements wherever it occurs in the sentence.
client-centered counseling
but
the counseling was client centered
the counseling was client-centered
t-test results
but
results from t tests
t-tests is t-tests is t-tests no matter where it turns up.

same-*** children
but
children of the same ***
Sure, because 'same ***' is not a compound adjective and so is only hyphenated in the first phrase in its capacity as a (temporary) compound modifier. In the second phrase, 'same' and '***' are two completely separate (equally stressed) words. Surely no-one would dream of writing 'children of the same-***'.
General Principle 4
Write most words formed with prefixes as one word. aftereffect
extracurricular
multiphase
socioeconomic
Amen. My General Principle 3.
General Principle 5
When two or more compound modifiers have a common base, this base is sometimes omitted in all except the last modifier, but the hyphens are retained.
Long- and short-term memory
2-, 3-, and 10-min trials
Ditto. My General Principle 4.
My main point of disagreement is with the principle of not using hyphens in compound adjectives when there is judged to be no ambiguity. I say that the absence of ambiguity in particular cases is irrelevant. Compound modifiers should generally be hyphenated, and hyphenation otherwise should generally follow stress-pattern.

Here then are the four modified general principles. I don't say that they can't be generalized, made more comprehensive, provided with lists of exceptions, or otherwise improved. I just give them as the minimal modification of the five APA principles required to make them acceptable - the truth, as it were, but not the whole truth.

(1) Hyphenate compound modifiers (whether temporary or permanent compounds).
(2) Hyphenate compound adjectives (irrespective of position in the sentence).
(3) Write words formed with prefixes as one word.
(4) When two or more compound modifiers have a common base, the base can be omitted in all but the last modifier with retention of the hyphens.
Gerald Smyth

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I've recently learned that the American Psychological Association publishes style-guidance ... in general with the things I've said here about hyphenation.[/nq]
[nq:1]Yes, but some of the rest of it is pretty out-there. This, for example, is from their guidance on avoiding ... man. Comment: Changes sentence construction to avoid use of the term "homosexuality". Why use one word when nine will do?[/nq]
How many people does it take to be "a lesbian or a gay man," anyway?

SML
ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu
http://pirate-women.com

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]How many people does it take to be "a lesbian or a gay man," anyway?[/nq]
Well, I am a lesbian man.

Saludos cordiales
Javi
Mood conjugation:
I enjoy a drop
You never say no
He is an alcoholic
(Craig Brown)

Usenet · Answer

(snip)
[nq:1]General Principle 1 Do not use a hyphen unless it serves a purpose. If a compound adjective cannot be misread or, as with many psychological terms, its meaning is established, a hyphen is not necessary. I maybe a quarter-agree[/nq]
a-quarter-agree?
[nq:1]with this.[/nq]
Rather, I obviously agree that a hyphen should not be used unless it serves a purpose, but I disagree on what that purpose is. I maybe quarter-agree with the rest.
(snip)
[nq:1] My General Principle 2 would be 'Use a hyphen with a compound adjective' (irrespective of its position in the ... compound adjective if the first element is not stressed. The hyphen indicates a close association between the elements wherever it[/nq]
the string, that is
[nq:1]occurs in the sentence.[/nq]
(snip)
Here are the four modified principles again, a bit further modified this time. It's probably not right to call them modified principles, though, because the first two are almost the exact opposite of the APA recommendations. ('Hyphenate' here, in a broad sense, could include writing the compound solid (as one word).)
(1) Hyphenate compound modifiers (whether temporary or permanent compounds).
(2) Hyphenate compound words (wherever they occur in the sentence). (3) Write words formed with prefixes as one word.
(4) When two or more compound modifiers have a common base, the base can be omitted in all but the last modifier with retention of the hyphens.
Exceptions may follow.
Gerald Smyth

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Words that could be misunderstood re-pair (pair again) re-form (form again) un-ionized 'Re-pair' is so obviously open to misinterpretation that I honestly don't think I'd use it. As to 'un-ionized', if the context is clearly chemical, misinterpretation is hardly possible.[/nq]
Misinterpretation of the unhyphenated form, you mean (but did not say). No more than mistaking 'anion' for a misspelt onion or cation for a misspelt nation.
[nq:1](1) Hyphenate compound modifiers (whether temporary or permanent compounds). (2) Hyphenate compound adjectives (irrespective of position in the sentence). (3) ... have a common base, the base can be omitted in all but the last modifier with retention of the hyphens.[/nq]
Thank you for your critical analysis of the APA guidelines on hyphenation.
So you take it upon yourself to effectively reverse the APA recommendations on two substantial points. I realize that the APA guidelines, skewed as they are by an excessive adherence to political correctness, may be somewhat unreliable; but do you really think you are qualified to reverse their recommendations? Might you not at least have waited until you'd presented the results of your planned survey? After all, you'll need to be able to convince people that (1) and (2) above are sensible prescriptions with a grounding in actual usage, and that the principle of using hyphens judiciously according to the criterion of perceived ambiguity, as promulgated by Mr Wordpecker and the author(s) of the APA style guidelines, really is irrelevant.

Pat Dillberry

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]So you(Gerald Smyth) take it upon yourself to effectively reverse the APA recommendations on two substantial points. I realize that ... adherence to political correctness, may be somewhat unreliable; but do you really think you are qualified to reverse their recommendations?[/nq]
Hey, anybody at all is just as qualified to make recommendations on English style than a bunch of psychologists, surely.
[nq:1]Might you not at least have waited until you'd presented the results of your planned survey? After all, you'll need ... criterion of perceived ambiguity, as promulgated by Mr Wordpecker and the author(s) of the APA style guidelines, really is irrelevant.[/nq]
The guideline that's the least ambiguous, least prone to inconsistencies and most straightforward to apply is almost the opposite of "using hyphens judiciously according to the criterion of perceived ambiguity". (Perceived by whom, anyway? the writer? The writer predicting the silliest interpretation that a really dumb reader might make? It's this: "compound-modifier hyphenatation is the way to go, unless it makes things even worse, in which case recast".

Ross Howard

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]So you(Gerald Smyth) take it upon yourself to effectively reverse ... you really think you are qualified to reverse their recommendations?[/nq]
[nq:1]Hey, anybody at all is just as qualified to make recommendations on English style than a bunch of psychologists, surely.[/nq]
As, I think I would've written there.
You may well be right. But let's wait and see whether Mr Smyth himself considers himself qualified.
[nq:2]Might you not at least have waited until you'd presented ... the author(s) of the APA style guidelines, really is irrelevant.[/nq]
[nq:1]The guideline that's the least ambiguous, least prone to inconsistencies and most straightforward to apply is almost the opposite of ... ambiguity". (Perceived by whom, anyway? the writer? The writer predicting the silliest interpretation that a really dumb reader might make?[/nq]
As perceived by the writer, presumably; who, according to Mr Cunningham, by omitting or inserting a hyphen informs the reader of his opinion as to the absence or presence, respectively, of ambiguity. It seems to me that one of the points Mr Smyth has been trying to make is that it is the arbitrariness and irrelevance of that opinion that make ambiguity unsuitable as a guide to hyphenation.
[nq:1]It's this: "compound-modifier hyphenatation is the way to go, unless it makes things even worse, in which case recast".[/nq]
There may also be cases where hyphens do not make things worse but nevertheless should not be insisted on. Examples might be:-

(1) Technical terms such as the names of chemical compounds (sodium chloride crystal, potassium permanganate solution). If there is no evidence of hyphenation in the technical literature, it is not reasonable to insist on it on the basis of Mr Smyth's unqualified first principle.
(2) Compound modifiers with some typographic feature that provides clumping of its own - what Mr Valentine calls hypohyphenation - rendering actual hyphenation unnecessary ( in vivo experiment, Chemical Communications article, Sunset Boulevard house).

I believe Mr Smyth's first principle will need to be qualified by reference to such cases.
Pat Dillberry

Style Guidance from American Psychological Association

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions