I had this note from a colleague.
Sorry to bother you on a weekend, but I have combed my books and cannot find an answer to satisfy a client on this issue.
The client asked for APA. The supervisor asked for APA. However, both want to put the literature review all in the present, despite APA asking for it to be in the past or present perfect, so it will follow smoothly from the introduction, which is all in the present and because they have a style guide from their institution that allows overrides to APA (go figure!).
They understand the findings and methods have to be in the past and the implications have to be in the present. However, here is the stumper: they want all the references to any scholar in the methods or findings to be in the present. I’m finding the shift from past and present to be very odd, and am arguing that because the methods describes things that have happened, the influence from scholars on method determination, etc., should also be in the past.
What do you think?
Here’s what I thought:
I have thought about it and consulted APA and I agree with you that it is weird and in particular that it would be very jarring to have those kinds of tense shifts. But the client makes the rules. I would send a query separate from the doc (i.e., an email) in which I indicate that I would advise against that practice because it does not follow APA and, more importantly, it does not work well in the text because it’s too disruptive. But then I would follow their instructions.
However you decide to play it, hope it works out!
The response:
Thanks Claire. Much appreciate your confirming my own gut response. Yes, the client is always right, even when they are wrong. 😉
It’s great to have our own instincts confirmed. I love having a community of colleagues I can go to with questions. They bring other perspectives and I learn new things, and of course the best response is always: You’re right!