TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This one looks like a question that should be solved just reading the package manual, but oddly I couldn't solve it neither that way.

I'm using natbib for an author-date bibliography style. I understood the difference between \citet and \citep. But, I can't understand the difference between \citet and the plain \cite.

Are they equal? Should I change all the \cite in \citet? (When I started writing I was using the classical 'Vancouver' style without natbib). Apparently the outputs of \cite and \citet look exactly the same.

share|improve this question
up vote 8 down vote accepted

The behavior of \cite{<key>} with natbib depends on the citation format (numerical vs. author-year) of the bibliography style in use. Thus, the results can be inconsistent (if you switch styles) and it's best to convert to \citet and \citep as appropriate.

From natbib (v8.31b) documentation, page 6:

Both \citep and \citet are defined by natbib and are thus not standard. The standard LaTeX command \cite should be avoided, because it behaves like \citet for author-year citations, but like \citep for numerical ones. There are many other commands for other special effects (Section 2.4).

share|improve this answer
I missed that part in the natbib documentation. Thank you very much. – Luca Amerio Jun 26 '14 at 19:17

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.