Works cited and bibliographys

[tom_e]

Quick question about these, are they different things?
To me a works cited section lists all the references I have used within my piece of work and a bibliography lists various sources I may have read while researching but haven't actually directly quoted within my work.
Does that sound about right or am I talking rubbish?

 

[Theophany]

I've always known them to be the same thing, unless you directly cite or reference a work it doesn't belong in your bibliography and is a bit cheat-y

It is also common to split your bibliography into primary sources, secondary works and archives, though this tends to be more for dissertations, theses and the like

 

[nydryl]

I'd say the two are interchangable.

 

[tom_e]

I'd say the two are interchangable.

That is how I've been using them but just thought when I was doing some work that I thought I'd heard about bibliographys being more of a reading list sort of thing.
Cheers for the replys

 

[AGD]

References section lists papers/jounals you have quoted or cited directly in the text.
Bibliography is everything else you read for the work that was relevant but that you haven't cited in the text.

 

[Aod]

References section lists papers/jounals you have quoted or cited directly in the text.
Bibliography is everything else you read for the work that was relevant but that you haven't cited in the text.

exactly, this is how i've always been taught.

 

[Amp34]

That is how I've been using them but just thought when I was doing some work that I thought I'd heard about bibliographys being more of a reading list sort of thing.
Cheers for the replys

Nope.

References section lists papers/jounals you have quoted or cited directly in the text.
Bibliography is everything else you read for the work that was relevant but that you haven't cited in the text.

Yep

Bibliographies are just books you may have read and I though were forgotten about after you left school, reference lists are then used where you list only references in text.

 

[w3bbo]

A Bibliography is not just books. It can include journals, magazines and websites, basicly anything you have researched relevent to the paper.

References, as stated in the post above is anything you directly quote or cited/paraphrased.

If you lift text from reference material it is a reference. For example if you write:

Kolb (1993) argues that a learning is lifelong because..... <----Reference it.

However, if you argue that learning is determined by lifelong experiences....<-----put things in the bibliography to lead the reader how you came to that statement.

Thats the way I alway interpreted it anyway.

 

[D.P.]

This also depends on what field you are in.

I am about to finish my PhD in CS. A Bibliography is a reference list and every reference or bib item has to be referenced in the text. This is standard across most sciences and engineering.
Who cares that you read a book a few years back that helped you make a decision. Either there is something specific in the the text that readers need to be aware of, or it is just background fluff.

Reading various sources without needing specific references is just called research.

You should also be careful, for my BSc. studies, if you listed a source in a bib. without a specific reference in the text then this was counted as plagiarism because it is then impossible for the reviewer or reader to know what ideas came from that source. Thus the assumption is that everything you wrote is plagiarised from that source unless you exactly specify what ideas are originally yours.

Plagerism is very serious and can lead to you to be kicked out of the uni, so I urge you to double check any official regulations.

 

[Cosimo]

References section lists papers/jounals you have quoted or cited directly in the text.
Bibliography is everything else you read for the work that was relevant but that you haven't cited in the text.

That's the way I've taken it to be.

 

[Edrof]

References section lists papers/jounals you have quoted or cited directly in the text.
Bibliography is everything else you read for the work that was relevant but that you haven't cited in the text.

+1

Also, always better to be comprehensive. In other words, list even minor things in the bib.

 

[Theophany]

This also depends on what field you are in.

I am about to finish my PhD in CS. A Bibliography is a reference list and every reference or bib item has to be referenced in the text. This is standard across most sciences and engineering.
Who cares that you read a book a few years back that helped you make a decision. Either there is something specific in the the text that readers need to be aware of, or it is just background fluff.

Reading various sources without needing specific references is just called research.

You should also be careful, for my BSc. studies, if you listed a source in a bib. without a specific reference in the text then this was counted as plagiarism because it is then impossible for the reviewer or reader to know what ideas came from that source. Thus the assumption is that everything you wrote is plagiarised from that source unless you exactly specify what ideas are originally yours.

Plagerism is very serious and can lead to you to be kicked out of the uni, so I urge you to double check any official regulations.

This. Your school should have official regulations on bibliography practices, but as above I've never heard of putting works that aren't cited into a bibliography, not in my college years or in either of the schools at my university.

In my experience you are expected to research the topic you're writing about, but only the work that you cite has a place in your bibliography. But there are plenty other here you have experience counter to this, so checking with whoever oversees your work is a must.

 

[Amp34]

A Bibliography is not just books. It can include journals, magazines and websites, basicly anything you have researched relevent to the paper.

References, as stated in the post above is anything you directly quote or cited/paraphrased.

If you lift text from reference material it is a reference. For example if you write:

Kolb (1993) argues that a learning is lifelong because..... <----Reference it.

However, if you argue that learning is determined by lifelong experiences....<-----put things in the bibliography to lead the reader how you came to that statement.

Thats the way I alway interpreted it anyway.

By books I meant all the other things.

And I was also going to post what D.P said, guess it depends on subject area, arts I guess a bibliography is ok but for sciences they are a no no.