TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

I'm preparing a paper for a publication, one of my references is an information package put out by the CDC. It has no listed author.

The author tag they suggest using looks like this:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

but the AMA-like citation style used by the journal's style file interprets this as:

[for Disease Control and (CDC), 2010]

That is, it thinks it's a paper by for Disease Control, Centers and (CDC), Prevention.

I tried the shortauthor tag, but it doesn't change the outcome under this template. Any suggestions?

share|improve this question
up vote 7 down vote accepted

Try to enclose the author field into a second pair of curly braces:

author = {{Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)}},
share|improve this answer

It might be worth testing the @manual or @misc template, which don't require an author, rather than twisting the Author field of the template you're currently using.

share|improve this answer
There's nothing twisted about having Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the author field. The issue is that the word "and" has a reserved meaning in author and editor fields, leading BibTeX to misinterpret the field as consisting of two separate authors ("Centers for Disease Control" and "Prevention"). Leaving off the author field when one exists would be a bad mistake. The only sensible remedy is to encase the entire author field in a second set of curly braces, as is suggested in the other answer. – Mico Sep 26 '13 at 15:25
@Mico my opinion (and I freely admit it's just that) is that an author is a person - i.e. until we have real AI, a human. – Chris H Sep 26 '13 at 15:27
You may be assigning a more specific meaning to "author" than was intended by the creator of BibTeX. Nothing wrong, really, with considering "corporate authors". – Mico Sep 26 '13 at 15:30
@Mico that's perfectly possible (bibtex also uses the singular form for plural authors), however if we take @article to refer to a paper in a journal, it should have a real author. Anyway, even if I were to refer to your/lockstep's solution (+1 btw) as a "workaround", it would still work, I merely offer a possible alternative. – Chris H Sep 26 '13 at 15:34

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.