1

I want to cite as "Simpson and Bouvier (2011, 2014a,b)" or "Simpson and Bouvier (2011, 2014a, 2014b)", but with apacite and the natbibapa option I am obtaining "Simpson and Bouvier (2011,1,1)". How to change this?

The MWE:

\documentclass[oneside,11pt]{article}

\usepackage[hidelinks]{hyperref}
\usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite}

\begin{document}

Got: Simpson and Bouvier (2011,1,1) using \cite{Simpson2011, Simpson2014, Simpson2014a}\\

Desired: Simpson and Bouvier (2011, 2014a,b) or Simpson and Bouvier (2011, 2014a, 2014b)

\begin{thebibliography}{3}

\bibitem[Simpson and Bouvier, 2011]{Simpson2011}
Simpson, H. and Bouvier, M. (2011).
\newblock Title 2011.
\newblock {\em Journal}, vol(num):pages.

\bibitem[Simpson and Bouvier, 2014a]{Simpson2014}
Simpson, H. and Bouvier, M. (2014a).
\newblock Title 2014a.
\newblock {\em Journal}, vol(num):pages.

\bibitem[Simpson and Bouvier, 2014b]{Simpson2014a}
Simpson, H. and Bouvier, B. (2014b).
\newblock Title 2014b.
\newblock {\em Journal}, vol(num):pages.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
2
  • 1
    The items shown in thebibliography do not quite look like the entries generated by apacite.bst when you use BibTeX. In particular apacite uses a more complex way to generate the extra label/letter. It would be possible to manually recreate that, but I think it is easier to use apacite with a .bst file and BibTeX as intended (and as shown in Mico's answer).
    – moewe
    Commented May 14, 2020 at 14:31
  • That's right, thanks @moewe. Please check my comment below Mico's answer.
    – epsilone
    Commented May 14, 2020 at 14:34

1 Answer 1

1

(too long for a comment, hence posted as an answer)

I am puzzled by your claim that \citet produces a citation call-out of the form "Simpson and Bouvier (2011,1,1)" -- at least if the supposition is that the entries in your thebibliography environment were created with the help of the apacite package and its eponymous bibliography style, viz., apacite.

For sure, if I create a small test bib file with three entries and a test LaTeX document that employs the apacite package and the apacite bibliography style, \citet generates a call-out that's precisely in one of the two formats you have declared to be acceptable.

enter image description here

\documentclass[11pt]{article}

\begin{filecontents}[overwrite]{mybib.bib}
@misc{Simpson2011, author="H. Simpson and M. Bouvier", year=2011, title="Thoughts {A}",}
@misc{Simpson2014a,author="H. Simpson and M. Bouvier", year=2014, title="Thoughts {B}",}
@misc{Simpson2014b,author="H. Simpson and M. Bouvier", year=2014, title="Thoughts {C}",}
\end{filecontents}

\usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite}
\bibliographystyle{apacite}
\usepackage[hidelinks]{hyperref} % load 'hyperref' last

\begin{document}
Desired: Simpson and Bouvier (2011, 2014a, 2014b)

\verb+\citet+: \citet{Simpson2011,Simpson2014a, Simpson2014b} 
\bibliography{mybib}
\end{document}
4
  • The MWE as posted in the question indeed produces "Simpson and Bouvier (2011,1,1)" for me, so I think it would be good to reword the second paragraph.
    – moewe
    Commented May 14, 2020 at 14:22
  • Thanks for your answer. I think the issue came from the fact that I generated the thebibliography environment from a bib file and a customized apalike.bst style, which I afterwards removed for making the MWE. If you replace \bibliographystyle{apacite} by \bibliographystyle{apalike} in your example, you will have "Simpson and Bouvier (2011,1,1)" again. Why I was mixing apalike.bst and the package apacite it's a good question...
    – epsilone
    Commented May 14, 2020 at 14:29
  • @epsilone - The title of your query contains the word apacite, not apalike. The only purposeful reason for having the instruction \usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite} in one's preamble is to use it together with \bibliographystyle{apacite}, to create a formatted bibliography that satisfies the requirements of the 6th edition of the "APA manual". You're just asking for trouble to mix and mis-match \usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite} with \bibliographystyle{apalike}. If you feel that my answer misses the point of your query, please go ahead and edit it to clarify what you actually did.
    – Mico
    Commented May 14, 2020 at 15:26
  • @moewe - I've updated the first two paragraphs of my answer to address your comment.
    – Mico
    Commented May 14, 2020 at 15:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .