Citation & Source Work

1 Citation & Source Work ^ top 

Academic work requires the ability to substantiate statements and arguments in a transparent manner and to ground them in existing knowledge. For this purpose, it is essential to draw on appropriate sources, reference them correctly, and make their origin clear. Working with sources and citing them is therefore not merely a formal requirement but a central element of academic integrity, discourse ethics, and methodological rigour from the very first sentence of an academic paper.

This chapter provides both the theoretical and practical foundations of citation and source work. It explains why and in what forms sources are used, how to distinguish between direct quotation and paraphrase, and which citation styles are applied in different disciplinary contexts. The emphasis lies on a reflective and independent engagement with the ideas of others - not only to avoid plagiarism but also as a vital part of active knowledge creation within one’s studies.

The aim is to develop a solid understanding of the function, selection, and documentation of academic sources, and to strengthen the ability to integrate them into one’s own work accurately, meaningfully, and purposefully.

Key Points for Chapter 1: ^ top 

1. Academic work requires sources
   Without precise references, any argument loses its traceability and persuasive power.

2. Paraphrasing is the standard
   Conveying the meaning in one’s own words is the preferred form of citation, as it demonstrates understanding, contextualisation, and independent further processing.

3. Sources are building blocks of argumentation, not mere quotation elements
   They should be integrated into one’s own argument both in content and structure.

4. Multiple sources increase validity
   Combining well-founded contributions provides an overview, enables differentiated contextualisation, and supports central statements with academic depth.

5. Integrate sources reflectively
   Academic work requires not only accurate reproduction of content but also critical contextualisation, evaluation, and further development within one’s own framework of thought.

1.1 Significance & Use of Academic Source Work ^ top 

Academic writing is based on the principle that all substantive statements must be verifiably supported or methodologically derived. Subjective opinions or personal assessments have no place without justification.

Academic work involves:

• Critical reflection
  Analysing and questioning existing theories, methods, or findings based on transparent criteria.

• Interpretation & argumentation
  Drawing conclusions from literature or data, developing well-founded viewpoints, and comparing alternative positions.

• Evaluation
  Assessing the significance, relevance, or applicability of sources in light of the current state of research.

• Positioning
  Developing a reasoned perspective within the field of differing research approaches - always referring back to the underlying sources.

This differs fundamentally from unsubstantiated claims and requires a systematic engagement with the literature, a coherent line of reasoning, and the ability to classify knowledge objectively and critically.

In academic texts, sources are not merely a formal obligation but an integral part of argumentation, theory building, and knowledge development. A reflective use of literature demonstrates that content is not simply adopted, but also contextualised, questioned, and further developed. Source work therefore makes a central contribution to the quality and validity of academic texts. Working with sources goes beyond merely acknowledging the ideas of others and serves as a key instrument for incorporating, contextualising, and advancing existing knowledge.

The following aspects illustrate the varied roles that sources take on in academic texts:

• Justification of statements
  Sources serve to substantiate academically sound claims. They provide empirical data, theoretical models, or methodological frameworks on which arguments can be based, ensuring the traceability and verifiability of one’s reasoning.

• Contextualisation within research
  Academic work never stands in isolation. Referring to existing literature shows how a topic has been discussed to date, which concepts and schools of thought are relevant, and where one’s own work either contributes new insights or challenges existing findings.

• Avoidance of redundancy
  A solid literature base prevents the repetition of known results or the presentation of trivial claims as new findings. Sources reveal what has already been researched and help to identify research gaps or critically expand on existing evidence.

• Connectivity in the academic discourse
  Through precise and standardised citation, the text is embedded within the broader academic context. Other researchers can verify sources, contextualise statements, and build on the work. Citation thus ensures continuity in scholarly discourse.

• Academic integrity
  Clearly acknowledging the use of others’ ideas makes intellectual authorship visible and protects against accusations of plagiarism. It also signals that the author has critically engaged with the material used and is not masking their own positions with the work of others.

Reflection Task / Activity ^ top 

Select 3 academic articles from your field of study and analyse how and for what purposes citations are used in them.

1.2 Direct Quotation & Paraphrasing ^ top 

In academic work, there are two fundamental ways of using sources: direct quotation and paraphrasing. Both serve to integrate external content into one’s own text, but they differ in function, form, and frequency of use.

Paraphrasing is the preferred form in academic writing. It demonstrates that content has been understood, expressed in one’s own words, and incorporated into the argument. Direct quotation, on the other hand, is used only in well-justified exceptional cases - for example, in precise legal formulations, in definitional statements, or when the language of the source itself is the subject of analysis.

The choice of form is not a matter of style but of content: it depends on whether the focus of the reference lies on the original wording or on the meaning conveyed.

1.2.1 Direct Quotation: Exact Reproduction of Wording ^ top 

A direct quotation reproduces a passage from a source exactly as it appears. It is marked by quotation marks and accompanied by an accurate reference. Direct quotations are only appropriate when the precise wording is essential or must not be altered - for example, in laws, normative texts, or formulations relevant for textual analysis.

Formal rules for direct quotations ^ top 

• Short quotations (up to approx. 40 words) are enclosed in quotation marks and integrated into the main text. Longer quotations are formatted as block quotes (separate line, indented, without quotation marks).
• The reference follows immediately after the quotation and includes the page number, as it reproduces content from a specific and clearly defined part of a source, e.g.
  "The term user satisfaction is defined very broadly in the literature and varies according to building typologies" (Busko et al., 2014, p. 8).
• The quoted wording must not be altered. Rules for omissions and the marking of errors are shown in the table below.

If the original text contains errors or requires clarifications, the following conventions apply:

Even with formal modifications, the principle of content fidelity remains: the intended meaning of the original must not be altered through omissions or additions.

Direct quotations remain an exception that must be justified. ^ top 

Excessive or uncritical use leads to fragmented text, stylistic breaks, and the impression of limited independent work. Wherever possible, paraphrasing should be used instead. In the fields of Energy & Sustainability Management, Facility Management, and Real Estate Management, direct quotations in academic work are uncommon and should be employed only in well-founded exceptional cases. These include, for example, legal texts whose wording is deliberately chosen and could be distorted through paraphrasing.

1.2.2 Paraphrasing: Understanding, Rewriting, and Contextualising Content ^ top 

Paraphrasing is the preferred form of source use in academic writing. It demonstrates that content has been understood, processed, and expressed in one’s own words. Unlike direct quotation, the focus is not on the exact wording but on the conceptual meaning of the source. Paraphrasing makes it possible to integrate external content linguistically into one’s own text and to develop it further within the argument.

Paraphrasing serves several central functions in the academic writing process. It is more than a stylistic rewording exercise - it forms the methodological and argumentative core of an independently written text. The following sub-functions illustrate the role of paraphrasing:

• Ensuring understanding
  Paraphrasing requires that the content of a source has been fully and accurately understood. Only after thorough engagement with the original text is it possible to reproduce central statements factually and in a nuanced way. Paraphrasing therefore demands active reading, critical thinking, and conceptual depth - not just linguistic rephrasing. Inaccurate paraphrases often indicate insufficient comprehension of the text.

• Argumentative integration
  Paraphrasing enables the conceptual linking of external findings with one’s own reasoning. It serves to embed existing research into one’s argumentation, to support or contrast positions. By incorporating paraphrased content into one’s own paragraphs and lines of thought, a coherent academic text emerges - one that is built on a logical engagement with scholarly literature rather than on isolated quotations.

• Stylistic integration
  Unlike direct quotations, which stand out linguistically from the text, paraphrased content can be seamlessly incorporated into the author’s own writing style. This allows for a smooth, professional flow of writing, improving readability and maintaining the reader’s engagement. From a stylistic perspective, paraphrasing also contributes significantly to the quality of academic writing.

• Avoidance of plagiarism
  Paraphrasing - correctly referenced with a complete citation - signals that external knowledge is not being presented as one’s own. It is essential that, despite linguistic rephrasing, it remains clear that the content comes from an external source. Paraphrases without a citation, or with only superficial rewording, pose a high risk of plagiarism. A properly constructed and well-referenced paraphrase ensures transparency about the origin of ideas while protecting the author from academic misconduct.

Even paraphrased statements must always be accompanied by a source reference - including a page number when a specific part of a text has been used.

Guide: 10 Steps to an Effective Paraphrase ^ top 

Paraphrasing a source is a demanding writing process that requires both a solid understanding of the content and strong language skills. To produce a paraphrase that is factually accurate, stylistically independent, and formally correct, the following multi-step approach is recommended.

The example below illustrates how the paraphrasing process can be carried out in practice.

Paraphrasing does not mean rewriting entire sections of text in new words, but rather selectively integrating individual ideas, statements, or arguments into one’s own text - linguistically independent, factually accurate, and well anchored in the flow of argumentation. The length of a paraphrase should always correspond to the scope of the statement being reproduced and to the academic purpose it serves.

Recommended length in academic contexts
In academic writing practice, a paraphrase typically consists of a sentence fragment, a single sentence, or a short sentence structure of up to two sentences. A maximum of 2-3 sentences is common when reproducing a somewhat more complex line of thought. Longer paraphrases (e.g. an entire paragraph) are exceptional and require particularly strong justification (e.g. reconstructing a theoretical model or presenting a comprehensive line of argumentation).

Reasons for this limitation:

• Academic conciseness: Paraphrases should capture the essential points succinctly. Overly detailed rewording often results in redundancy.
• Preserving independence: The longer the paraphrase, the greater the risk that it overshadows one’s own text. Paraphrases should always be embedded in the author’s own writing - not dominate it.
• Reader guidance and clarity: Shorter paraphrases can be more easily linked to, commented on, or critiqued in the context of the author’s own reasoning. They support the flow of argumentation rather than disrupting it.
• Plagiarism prevention: Long, formally paraphrased but otherwise uncommented passages can easily appear as disguised reproduction - especially if no critical analysis is added.

When paraphrasing a source, ask which idea from the source is relevant to your own argument. The goal is not to rewrite an entire passage, but to concisely capture and accurately reflect the key points in a considered and critical way.

Examples of different paraphrase lengths ^ top 

• Example of an overly long paraphrase. This retells nearly every aspect of the source, functioning as little more than a reworded version of the original, leaving little room for the author’s own analysis or argument.

  In their systematic review, Huber et al. (2014) analyse international studies on user satisfaction in buildings. They show that interest in the topic has increased in recent years, but relatively few studies adopt a cross-country perspective. Instead, research focuses predominantly on individual building types, with little comparison between building types and countries. Data collection is primarily via questionnaires, which vary considerably in design. Definitions of research objectives also differ: in addition to user satisfaction, productivity and customer loyalty are cited as further targets. Notably, no clear influencing factors could be identified, and these differ depending on building type. The study also concludes that the identified criteria for measuring satisfaction do not necessarily reflect their actual importance (p. 10).

• Example of a short, effective paraphrase. This condenses the key message into a single sentence, is easily integrated into other arguments, and maintains linguistic independence.

  Huber et al. (2014) show that international studies on user satisfaction remain neither methodologically consistent nor content-wise comparable, due in part to varying definitions of objectives and non-standardised survey tools.

• Example of a sentence fragment as paraphrase. Suitable for integration into a broader argument.

  ...as also evidenced by studies on the lack of standardisation in user satisfaction research (see Huber et al., 2014, p. 10).

Integration vs. Parenthesis ^ top 

In academic writing, it is not only what is cited that matters - but also how. The method of integrating a source affects the structure of the argument, readability, and the emphasis placed on a statement. There are two ways to reference paraphrased content correctly:

• Integration of the author(s) into the sentence
• Parenthetical citation at the end of the sentence

Both forms differ grammatically and functionally. One emphasises the scholarly contribution of the source as part of the argument, the other uses the source primarily as evidence. A deliberate choice between the two helps to make academic texts clear, transparent, and nuanced.

1. Integration of the author(s) into the sentence
   For citations, it is important to make clear whose ideas, results, or positions are being reproduced. For paraphrases, there are two basic ways of incorporating sources, which differ both stylistically and functionally.

   In this approach, the source is integrated directly into the sentence so that the author names form a grammatical part of the statement. The authorship is thus presented as the agent of the knowledge, and it becomes immediately clear who contributed which statement, perspective, or research finding.

   This form is particularly appropriate when the academic work is analysing, evaluating, or situating content within a discourse. It not only provides evidence but also highlights the source as the subject of a claim, making a specific theoretical, methodological, or empirical contribution.

   Example:

   Huber et al. (2014) show that international research on user satisfaction is, to date, neither methodologically consistent nor comparable in content. The studies often focus on individual building types, use different questionnaires, and follow varying definitions of objectives (p. 10).

   Application:

   • Emphasises the scholarly origin of a statement and promotes transparency in the argument’s structure.
   • Facilitates comparison of different positions, e.g. in literature reviews, discussion sections, or theoretical frameworks.
   • Especially useful when a source’s contribution is to be commented on, critically evaluated, or compared with other positions.
   • Supports the discursive quality of the text: readers can more easily identify which contributions come from which sources.
   • Serves academic-historical or systematic classification, e.g. when contrasting different research approaches, schools, or paradigms.
   • Enhances precision in source work, as the source is not only formally referenced but also substantively acknowledged.
   • Promotes argumentative depth, as the source remains a visible voice in the discourse - not just a data provider.

2. Parenthetical citation at the end of the sentence (Parenthesis)
   In this approach, the source reference appears in round brackets at the end of a paraphrased statement. In academic writing, this is known as a parenthesis - a grammatical insertion that provides additional information but is not essential to the sentence structure.

   This type of citation serves primarily to indicate the origin of information, not as an integral, content-shaping element of the sentence. The statement itself is formulated entirely in the author’s own words, without the source being embedded as the subject, object, or authority signal.

   Example:

   User satisfaction is often operationalised differently in international studies, which significantly limits the comparability of results (Huber et al., 2014, p. 10).

   Application:

   • The focus remains on the author’s own argument, not on the source.
   • The source functions as evidence, not as the main thematic subject.
   • The flow of the text remains stylistically consistent and free of potentially distracting name references.
   • Ideal for condensing multiple sources, e.g. to support a general finding.
   • Highlights the author’s own contribution - external knowledge is reflected upon, contextualised, and integrated.
   • Easy to automate and format - particularly when using reference management software.
   • In sections with many references, it keeps the argumentation clear and transparent, as evidence and statement are visually distinct.
   • Facilitates later editing and structuring of academic texts, as the citation system remains independent of sentence construction.

Note: In academic writing, neither form should be used exclusively. Whether a source is integrated into the sentence or referenced parenthetically depends on the content of the statement and its role in the argument. If the scholarly contribution of a particular author is in focus or subject to critical discussion, integration into the sentence is advisable. If the source merely serves as evidence for a claim without being discussed itself, the parenthesis is sufficient. A deliberate choice of citation style supports both the logical structure and the reader’s navigation of the text.

Examples of integrating author(s) from one or more sources into a paraphrase ^ top 

• Huber et al. (2014) argue that research on user satisfaction has so far been neither methodologically consistent nor comparable in content.

• According to Huber et al. (2014), studies tend to focus on individual building types and employ non-standardised questionnaires.

• As shown by the analysis of Huber et al. (2014), both the definitions of objectives and the measurement instruments used vary considerably.

• In their systematic study, Huber et al. (2014) demonstrate that the comparability of international studies is limited by methodological inconsistencies.

• Huber et al. (2014) state that definitions of key influencing factors on user satisfaction are not applied consistently.

• Based on the findings of Huber et al. (2014), it can be observed that a general lack of standardisation impairs the comparability of studies.

• Huber et al. (2014) emphasise that questionnaire design and methodological approaches have so far not enabled comparability between building types.

• In the study by Huber et al. (2014), it becomes evident that essential influencing variables are not clearly operationalised and are therefore difficult to compare.

• As Huber et al. (2014) critically note, differing objectives and instruments hinder a coherent synthesis of existing research findings.

• The evidence from Huber et al. (2014) suggests that current survey methods are not suitable for producing generalisable findings on user satisfaction.

• From the work of Huber et al. (2014) it follows that existing studies are methodologically fragmented and lack a standardised approach.

• Huber et al. (2014) formulate that international comparisons have not yet been possible due to inconsistent objectives and methods.

• According to the findings of Huber et al. (2014), it remains unclear which factors actually influence user satisfaction, as empirical operationalisations are lacking.

• Huber et al. (2014) explain that research often emphasises individual aspects without enabling an overarching comparative perspective.

• As Huber et al. (2014) conclude, research shows a clear prioritisation of certain building types, while other dimensions are neglected.

• Both Huber et al. (2014) and Busko et al. (2014) demonstrate that international research on user satisfaction is characterised by a lack of methodological standards and inconsistent terminology, with particular emphasis on differences between building typologies.

• The studies by Huber et al. (2014) and Busko et al. (2014) concur that user satisfaction is not uniformly defined in the literature and is variably operationalised depending on building type, making systematic comparisons difficult.

• While Huber et al. (2014) highlight methodological inconsistencies and a lack of comparability, Busko et al. (2014) emphasise the inconsistent use of the term user satisfaction depending on building context.

• According to Huber et al. (2014), many studies focus on individual building types with varying definitions of objectives, which, as Busko et al. (2014) point out, is also linked to highly diverse interpretations of the term user satisfaction in the literature.

• The state of research, as outlined by Huber et al. (2014) and Busko et al. (2014), points to a fundamental problem of definition and comparability in the study of user satisfaction - particularly regarding building typologies and survey designs.

• Both sources (Huber et al., 2014; Busko et al., 2014) make clear that neither standardised instruments nor consistent terminology are in place, making a systematic analysis of user satisfaction across building types highly challenging.

Checklist: Correct Paraphrase ^ top 

Paraphrasing is an expression of independent academic practice. It shows that information has not only been taken over, but also understood, examined, and integrated into the author’s own reasoning.

1.2.3 Using multiple sources for chains of argument and drawing conclusions ^ top 

In academic writing, arguments often unfold across several successive source references. Different studies may be contrasted with one another or combined to support a finding. Both forms are relevant to scholarly discourse and fulfil different functions.

Multiple sources with consistent findings ^ top 

Not only divergent positions but also converging research results benefit from the citation of multiple sources. Even when studies arrive at similar conclusions, presenting them together is worthwhile:

• Strengthening the evidence base: Agreement among several independent studies increases the academic reliability of the argument.
• Multiperspectivity: Similar results from different research designs (e.g. qualitative interviews vs. standardised surveys) demonstrate the breadth of the empirical foundation.
• Signalling relevance: Repeated discussion by different authors underscores the importance of the topic within the field.
• Discursive density: Chains of argument benefit from the concise presentation of an established consensus.

Examples:

1. Both Huber et al. (2014) and Busko et al. (2014) make it clear that the state of research on user satisfaction is characterised by considerable conceptual and methodological heterogeneity. The literature is marked not only by varying definitions of the term but also by differences in underlying objectives, building typologies, and survey instruments.

2. Huber et al. (2014) point out that international studies on user satisfaction are neither methodologically uniform nor comparable in content, highlighting in particular the differences in survey methodology and objective definition across building types (p. 10). Busko et al. (2014) likewise emphasise that the term user satisfaction is broadly defined in the literature and used differently depending on the building type (p. 8). Together, these contributions demonstrate that existing research is marked by a lack of conceptual and methodological standardisation.

Multiple sources with differing findings ^ top 

Divergent research results are not a weakness but a key driver of scholarly debate. Where studies arrive at different findings, employ varying methods, or adopt divergent theoretical perspectives, they open up valuable opportunities for reflection, contextualisation, and critical interpretation:

• Contrasting research approaches: Differing results may be due to variations in target groups, research designs, or underlying theoretical assumptions. Juxtaposing these findings highlights methodological diversity and deepens academic understanding.
• Highlighting methodological differences: When similar research questions are addressed using different methods (e.g. standardised survey vs. qualitative case study), differences in findings can be linked to methodological approaches and critically discussed.
• Positioning minority perspectives: Studies that deviate from the mainstream deserve particular attention - not to diminish the majority view, but to examine alternative interpretations, innovative approaches, or context-specific insights.
• Enabling one’s own position: Presenting different perspectives provides a basis for one’s own evaluation, nuanced argumentation, or theory-based synthesis within the scope of the research.
• Discursive openness rather than false consensus: Scholarship thrives on tolerance for ambiguity. Making divergent findings visible fosters a critical, pluralistic perspective and prevents premature harmonisation.

Examples

1. While Huber et al. (2014, p. 10) critically emphasise the lack of comparability in international studies on user satisfaction, Busko et al. (2014, p. 8) view the context-dependent definition of the term as a necessary differentiation along specific building typologies.

2. Huber et al. (2014) criticise the lack of methodological and conceptual standardisation in international studies on user satisfaction, regarding this as a central shortcoming for the comparability of results (p. 10). In contrast, Busko et al. (2014) argue that varying conceptual understandings by building type are reasonable, as they better reflect different user needs and usage contexts (p. 8).

Note: The focus is not on the sheer number of sources but on their functional role within the argument. Three poorly selected sources will support an argument less effectively than two carefully chosen ones that reflect different perspectives or forms of evidence. Critical engagement with individual key sources is also appropriate - but it should always be embedded in a broader set of references.

1.2.4 Essential integration and critical reflection of citations ^ top 

Citing is not an end in itself. In academic writing, the goal is not to reproduce external content verbatim or to paraphrase it in the most varied or elegant way possible. The aim is to understand relevant external knowledge and systematically integrate it into one’s own argument. A citation therefore never stands in isolation but serves as the starting point for a further, critically reflective engagement with the source.

In the academic context, critical reflection means more than simply agreeing or disagreeing with a statement. It involves analysing, contextualising, and evaluating the content of a source in a nuanced way, and linking it to one’s own reasoning or empirical evidence. Critical reflection marks an active, intellectually independent engagement with the state of research - and is thus a core feature of scholarly work. This reflection includes, among other things:

• Content comprehension - What does the source state? What is left unsaid?
• Quality analysis - How strong are the argumentation, methodology, and evidence base?
• Contextualisation - How does the source relate to other research positions?
• Own evaluation - What relevance or limitations does it have for one’s own work?
• Transfer or development - What can be derived from it for one’s own argument, method, or theoretical framework?

Citations are therefore not the conclusion but the starting point of an academic line of thought. They serve as a reference framework for one’s own arguments, which connect to, evaluate, or further develop the source. Possible forms of critical integration include:

• Confirmation
  The paraphrased statement is supported or expanded through one’s own arguments, empirical findings, or additional theoretical references.

• Questioning
  Reasoned doubts are expressed - for example, through methodological critique, alternative research findings, or contradictory empirical results.

• Extension or differentiation
  The statement is not challenged but supplemented - for instance, by adding perspectives, contextual limitations, or theoretical elaborations.

• Placement in the research context
  The source is related to other studies, theories, or approaches, embedding it in a broader scholarly framework.

The source is not a decorative element but part of the argumentative structure. It provides impulses, evidence, contrasts, or perspectives - but the scholarly contribution lies in what is made of it.

Examples of Critical Reflection of a Paraphrase ^ top 

Original statement:

Huber et al. (2014) de­mon­strate that in­ter­na­tion­al re­search on us­er sat­is­fac­tion in build­ings is nei­ther meth­od­olog­ic­ally con­sist­ent nor sub­stant­ively com­par­able. Stud­ies of­ten fo­cus on spe­cif­ic build­ing types, em­ploy dif­fer­ent ques­tion­naires, and pur­sue vary­ing ob­ject­ives (p. 10).

Examples of Critical Reflection of a Direct Quotation ^ top 

Quotation:

"The term user sat­is­fac­tion is very broad­ly de­fined in the lit­er­a­ture and var­ies ac­cord­ing to build­ing ty­pol­og­ies" (Busko et al., 2014, p. 8)

Interim Conclusion after Multiple Sources ^ top 

At the end of an argumentative unit in which multiple sources have been synthesised or contrasted, an integrated interim conclusion is particularly effective. It provides the opportunity not merely to list scholarly positions, but to embed them purposefully within one’s own line of reasoning. Such interim conclusions are an expression of academic reflection and allow readers to clearly situate what can be inferred from the preceding discussion.

Unlike purely descriptive literature reviews, which present studies side by side, the interim conclusion marks an initial form of scholarly positioning: the cited research is processed, critically assessed, and utilised for the development of one’s own argument.

• Condensation:
  The interim conclusion distils multiple individual findings into a concise statement. It reduces complexity without disregarding important nuances.

• Contextualisation:
  It demonstrates how, from your perspective, the cited sources are to be evaluated: do they support your argument, contradict it, or offer relevant points of connection?

• Transparency:
  Readers can see the conclusion you draw from the previously discussed literature - a key element of scholarly traceability.

• Capacity for Discourse:
  An interim conclusion opens space for further development of the argument - for example, by connecting additional sources, initiating a critical discussion, or deriving one’s own research question.

Examples:

1. Both Huber et al. (2014) and Busko et al. (2014) demonstrate an insufficient theoretical foundation within the research field, making a clear conceptual framework and a transparent methodological approach essential in the present study.

2. Huber et al. (2014) and Busko et al. (2014) refer to methodological and conceptual inconsistencies in user satisfaction research. Taken together, these works reveal a lack of theoretical grounding that hampers systematic comparison. This underscores the relevance of consistent terminology and methodologically traceable procedures within this investigation.

3. Huber et al. (2014) highlight the limited comparability of international studies and criticise the strong variation in goal definitions and survey instruments. Complementing this, Busko et al. (2014) point to the very broad and building-type-specific use of the concept of user satisfaction. Together, these contributions indicate that a lack of theore

1.3 Display of Citations in the Text ^ top 

The presentation of citations in academic practice can take various forms. Depending on the discipline, target audience, medium, and applicable referencing standards, source information may be provided directly within the text, as a footnote or endnote, in numerical form, or in hybrid formats. Each method of citation serves the fundamental purpose of making the origin of statements transparent, acknowledging intellectual property, and ensuring the verifiability of content.

The choice of a particular presentation style influences the reading flow, the visual layout of the document, and the level of detail with which supplementary information can be provided. While in some disciplines brief in-text citations are the standard practice, others prefer extensive footnotes or a numbered referencing system. Familiarity with the different techniques is therefore an essential prerequisite for correct and audience-appropriate academic writing.

1.3.1 Decision Criteria for the Choice of Referencing Rules ^ top 

Selecting an appropriate referencing method is a central aspect of academic writing. It is not merely a formal matter but has a direct impact on the readability, comprehensibility, and connectivity of a piece of work. Several factors determine which system is used.

• 1. Discipline and Academic Community
  Each discipline has developed its own citation conventions over decades. These are closely linked to the publication formats and discursive practices common within the scholarly community.

• 2. Publication Format and Medium
  The medium in which a work is published or presented significantly influences the form of citation. In print and online publications, extensive footnotes and complex layouts are generally possible. Digital formats additionally require linkable references, such as DOI numbers or hyperlinks, to enable direct access to the source. These often include clickable in-text links to detailed information in the bibliography or reference section. Presentations, on the other hand, usually do not contain a dedicated bibliography or reference list; all sources are indicated directly on the respective slide. Infographics, posters, and short brochures also require concise and space-saving citations to avoid compromising the visual design.

• 3. Institutional and Formal Requirements
  Universities, departments, and academic publishers often prescribe binding citation standards. These requirements are set out in examination regulations, style guides, or author guidelines. Failure to comply may result in formal deductions or rejection of the publication.

1.3.2 Overview of Citation Types: In-Text, Footnote, Endnote, Numerical Referencing ^ top 

The formal presentation of citations within the text can be realised in different ways. What matters is not only which source is cited, but also how it is made visible. The form in which the source is displayed affects the readability, traceability, and layout of an academic text. In practice, several citation styles have become established, with preferences varying depending on discipline, publication format, or institutional requirements.

• in-text referencing, where the source is visible directly within the running text

• footnotes, which place the source on the same page but outside the main body of the text

• endnotes, which list all references collectively at the end of a chapter or the document

• numerical referencing, in which a consecutive number refers to an entry in the bibliography

All these forms share the aim of making the origin of statements transparent and ensuring academic traceability. The specific implementation - such as placement, formatting, abbreviation rules, or page references - varies according to style and context.

In-text Referencing ^ top 

In-text referencing places a short reference to the source directly within the running text. It contains the surname of the author or, in the case of multiple authors, the surname of the first author with a possible abbreviated designation of co-authors (et al.), the year of publication, and - in the case of direct quotations or precise references - a locator (e.g. page number, section, chapter number). Punctuation usually follows the bracket or the complete reference. The full bibliographic entry appears only in the bibliography or reference list.

• Example in the text:

  • Sentence-integrated: Huber et al. (2014) demonstrate that international research on user satisfaction is neither methodologically standardised nor comparable in terms of content. Studies often focus on individual building types, use different questionnaires, and pursue varying definitions of objectives (p. 10).
  • Parenthetical: User satisfaction is often operationalised differently in international studies, which significantly limits the comparability of results (Huber et al., 2014, p. 10).

• Example in the bibliography:
  Huber, C., Koch, D., & Busko, S. (2014). An international comparison of user satisfaction in buildings from the perspective of facility management. International Journal of Facility Management, 5(2).

• Notes on spelling/application

  • A full stop or comma follows the bracket: … (Author, Year, p. x).
  • Page references use "p."/"pp." in English-language texts, and "S." in German-language works.

Footnotes ^ top 

In footnotes, the reference is indicated in the text by a superscript number. The corresponding note appears at the bottom of the page, usually set apart from the main text by a dividing line and often printed in a smaller font size. Footnotes may contain not only bibliographic references but also clarifying remarks. A clear link between the number in the text and the corresponding entry in the footnote is essential. From a typographic perspective, the footnote number is generally placed after the closing punctuation mark. Numbering is usually continuous throughout the document, although in some cases it is reset for each chapter, depending on the specific guidelines.

• Example in the text:

  • Integrated into the sentence: Huber et al. demonstrate that international research on user satisfaction has so far been neither methodologically consistent nor comparable in content. The studies often focus on individual building types, use different questionnaires, and pursue varying definitions of objectives.¹
  • Parenthetical: User satisfaction is frequently operationalised in different ways in international studies, which significantly limits the comparability of the results.²

• Example in the footnotes:
  1 Huber et al., 2014, p. 10.
  2 Ibid., p. 10.

• Example in the reference list:
  Huber, C., Koch, D., & Busko, S. (2014). An international comparison of user satisfaction in buildings from the perspective of facility management. International Journal of Facility Management, 5(2).

• Notes on usage

  • The superscript footnote number normally follows the final punctuation mark.
  • Ensure consistent numbering of footnotes (either document-wide or chapter by chapter, according to the chosen convention).

Endnotes ^ top 

Endnotes are functionally equivalent to footnotes but are collected at the end of a chapter or at the end of the document. A separate bibliography or reference list is therefore not provided. In the text, a superscript number appears at the point of citation. All notes are centrally listed in the endnote section, arranged numerically. This arrangement facilitates a compact page layout in the main text and keeps detailed information consolidated. However, to verify a source, the reader must always navigate to the end of the document. Numbering is continuous (either for the entire document or per chapter, depending on the guidelines). Each occurrence is assigned its own number, even if it refers to the same source. Numbers are therefore not reused. Page references - as with footnotes - are given directly in the respective endnote entry.

• Example in the text:

  • Sentence-integrated: Huber et al. demonstrate that international research on user satisfaction is neither methodologically standardised nor comparable in terms of content. Studies often focus on individual building types, use different questionnaires, and pursue varying definitions of objectives.^[1]
  • Parenthetical: User satisfaction is often operationalised differently in international studies, which significantly limits the comparability of results.^[2]

• Example endnotes:
  [1] Huber, C., Koch, D., & Busko, S. (2014). An international comparison of user satisfaction in buildings from the perspective of facility management. International Journal of Facility Management, 5(2), p. 10.
  [2] Huber et al., 2024, p. 10.

• Notes on spelling/application

  • Place the superscript number in the text, usually after the final punctuation mark, and position it consistently throughout the document.
  • Maintain continuous numbering (document-wide or per chapter); each repeated citation - even of the same source - receives a new endnote number.
  • Provide the full reference with page number for the first occurrence; subsequent references may be given in abbreviated form.

Numeric citation ^ top 

Numeric citation replaces the short in-text reference with a reference number that corresponds to an entry in a numbered reference list. The sources are numbered consecutively, and identical sources are assigned the same number. The number appears in the text in square brackets, round brackets, or as superscript, depending on the style guide. Page numbers are placed directly after the number. The bibliography or reference list arranges the titles in the order of their first appearance or according to a predefined sorting logic, with the numbering remaining unique. The numbering in the reference list must correspond exactly to the numbering used in the text (not in alphabetical order).

• Example in the text:

  • Sentence-integrated: Huber et al. demonstrate that international research on user satisfaction is neither methodologically standardised nor comparable in terms of content. Studies often focus on individual building types, use different questionnaires, and pursue varying definitions of objectives [1, p. 10].
  • Parenthetical: User satisfaction is often operationalised differently in international studies, which significantly limits the comparability of results [1, p. 10].

• Example in the reference list:
  [1] Huber, C., Koch, D., & Busko, S. (2014). An international comparison of user satisfaction in buildings from the perspective of facility management. International Journal of Facility Management, 5(2).

• Notes on spelling/application

  • Number references in the order of their first appearance in the text; the same source retains the same number for all subsequent citations.
  • Choose one notation style and apply it consistently: square brackets [1], round brackets (1), or superscript ¹, depending on the style guide.
  • The full stop follows the numerical reference.
  • Separate multiple references with commas: [1, 3, 5].
  • In case of text rearrangements or later insertions, update the numbering carefully.

1.3.3 Overview of example citation styles: APA, Chicago, ISO 690, Harvard, MLA, ACM, Vancouver ^ top 

Citation styles define the conventions for presenting source information in the text and in the bibliography/reference list. Depending on the style, the formatting of elements such as author names, publication years, titles, journals, volumes/issues, pages, DOIs/URLs, and punctuation varies. The following table illustrates how the same reference appears in different styles.

1.3.4 Application: Consistency and systematic implementation ^ top 

Selecting a citation style alone does not guarantee formal quality. What is crucial is the consistent and rule-compliant application throughout the entire text. Even minor deviations in punctuation, italicisation, or the rendering of names can undermine the scholarly impression or lead to the rejection of a work. In addition to content accuracy, formal consistency must be ensured - both in the main text and in the bibliography or reference list.

• Every cited source must be clearly traceable. This is required by copyright law and is a prerequisite for verifiability, one of the fundamental principles of science and academic work.

• All in-text references must be fully represented in the reference list - and vice versa.

• Abbreviation rules such as et al., the formatting of title elements (italics, sentence-case vs. title-case capitalisation), as well as punctuation (full stops, commas, semicolons) must be applied uniformly within the same document.

• The order of elements (e.g. Author - Year - Title - Journal - Volume - Issue - Pages - DOI) must follow the chosen style exactly.

Citation practice is particularly prone to error when the style is changed during the writing process or when sources are manually added. To avoid this, the use of digital tools is recommended.

Use of reference management tools ^ top 

Reference management tools assist in capturing, organising, inserting, and formatting bibliographic references. They offer extensive interfaces to databases, online catalogues, and word-processing systems, and enable the automatic generation of bibliographies and in-text citations in the desired style. Formatting is usually based on pre-installed citation templates and can be switched to another style - for example from APA to MLA, DIN 690, Chicago, or Vancouver - with just a few clicks.

In addition, they allow the import of bibliographic metadata via standardised formats such as DOI, ISBN, RIS, or BibTeX, thereby enabling the automated entry of many required parameters. Within the software, references can be flexibly organised into groups, collections, or tagged with keywords, which is particularly useful for maintaining an overview during more extensive research projects.

For seamless integration into the writing process, many reference management tools provide plug-ins or add-ons for widely used word processing systems. These allow citations and bibliography entries to be inserted, updated, and edited automatically, thereby eliminating the need for time-consuming manual reformatting.

Examples of widely used tools:

Key guidelines for effective use:

• Verify metadata: Many automatically imported entries are incomplete or incorrectly formatted. Spelling, capitalisation, author order, and locators should always be checked manually.

• Select the citation style at an early stage: Changing it later can cause technical conflicts, particularly when entries have been inserted manually.

• Ensure synchronisation and backups, especially when using cloud-based tools.

• Organise collaborative work clearly: Shared libraries require agreed rules on naming conventions, duplicate handling, and access rights.

2 Types of sources and their citation ^ top 

Source types differ in their formal structure, their functional role within academic work, and the requirements for proper citation. Each source type demands specific mandatory elements that make its origin traceable, verifiable, and uniquely identifiable. Understanding the distinctions between source types is essential to avoid formal errors, to uphold academic standards, and to prevent plagiarism.

Key points for Chapter 2 ^ top 

1. The type of source determines the citation method
   Each source is subject to specific formal requirements which must be applied precisely, regardless of the medium.

2. Form follows content, not file format
   Documents available online are categorised according to their content source, not the display format (HTML, PDF, image).

3. Completeness is mandatory
   Author, year, title, publisher, identifiers, and, where applicable, version or edition must be provided as fully as possible.

4. Special cases require adaptation
   Legal texts, standards, social media content, or audiovisual formats follow their own conventions, which must not be derived from standard citation styles.

5. Consistent source evaluation
   Before citing, check whether the source is authentic, traceable, and academically relevant.

2.1 General principles for source referencing ^ top 

Regardless of the chosen citation style, certain fundamental principles apply to the formal referencing of sources. These ensure that the literature used is clearly identifiable, traceable, and accurately placed within its academic context. Citation rules are not based solely on stylistic guidelines but also on the academic principles of transparency, replicability, and authorship.

The following overview systematises typical decision-making scenarios in source referencing - for example, when no author or year is given, when there is uncertainty about a specific version of a work, when deciding between DOI and URL, or when indicating roles such as editor or translator. It serves as a cross-style reference for all source types and writing contexts, and is particularly useful when formal details are incomplete, ambiguous, or non-standardised.

2.1 Monograph / Book (print or eBook) ^ top 

A monograph is an independent, self-contained publication on a specific topic. It is usually authored by one or a small number of individuals and addresses the subject systematically, comprehensively, and with academic rigour. Monographs differ from edited volumes, series, or serial publications through their formal and thematic coherence.

Monographs may be published as printed books or as eBooks. In digital form, they are typically made available via platforms (e.g. publishers’ websites, repositories, eBook databases). Differences in format affect the formal elements of citation - particularly regarding the DOI or the URL.

Many brochures, reports or research documents may also have a monographic character if they:

• are self-contained,
• treat a single subject comprehensively,
• are not part of a series,
• clearly identify an author or issuing institution, and
• do not consist of a collection of separate contributions.

In such cases, the same citation rules apply as for traditional monographs, taking into account institutional authorship (e.g. ministries, NGOs, research institutes).

Special considerations and recommendations

• Identification number: If a DOI is available, it should be used - in the format https://doi.org/.... URLs should only be used if no DOI exists. ISBN is optional but often included in bibliographic lists.

• Institution as author: If no personal author is named, the organisation should be listed as the group author.

• Translations: If a translation is relevant to the cited edition, the translator’s name may be added.

• Reprints: If a reissued edition of an older work is used, the original year may be added in parentheses.

2.2 Contribution in Edited Volume / Collected Work ^ top 

An edited volume (also referred to as a collected work, edited book, or scholarly volume) consists of several self-contained contributions by different authors. These address a shared overarching theme and are compiled under the editorial responsibility of one or more editors. The individual chapters or essays are usually authored by experts from various disciplines or institutions.

Contributions in edited volumes are independent scholarly publications and should be cited in the same way as a book chapter, not as the entire volume. The edited volume itself is recorded bibliographically as it constitutes the source publication.

A contribution in a collected work differs from a monograph in that the entire publication cannot be attributed to a single author.

Edited volumes may appear in print or as eBooks. The decisive factor is always the citation of the specific contribution, not the whole work - unless the entire volume is referenced (e.g. in the case of forewords, literature reviews, or when no individual chapter titles are provided).

Special considerations and recommendations

• "In" statement: In most citation styles, the word "In" is placed between the contribution and the edited volume.

• Page reference: Always indicate only the page range of the specific contribution, not the full extent of the entire volume.

• eBook: If the contribution has been published online, the DOI should be provided rather than only a general URL.

• Multiple editors: List all names; abbreviate with "et al." if required by the citation style.

2.3 Academic Journal Article ^ top 

Scholarly journal articles (also referred to as journal papers, academic articles, or research papers) are contributions published in periodically issued academic journals. They represent a central form of scholarly communication, particularly in research-intensive disciplines.

Such articles are generally subjected to a peer-review process to ensure academic quality, relevance, and verifiability. In addition to traditional print journals, there is a wide range of online journals, open-access platforms, and hybrid publication formats.

A scholarly article is always associated with a specific journal, which is organised by volume, issue, and page numbers or article identifiers. In citations, the specific article is always referenced, not the journal issue as a whole.

Many articles are now assigned a DOI (Digital Object Identifier), enabling reliable and permanent linking in digital environments. In online-first or early-access versions, the year of final publication may differ from the upload date.

Special considerations and recommendations

• DOI: The DOI is the most reliable identifier and should always be provided in the format https://doi.org/....

• Volume/Issue: Some journals omit the issue number; in such cases, provide only the volume. If no volume exists, the publication date or article number is usually used.

• Open Access: For articles with a freely accessible URL, an access date may also be required if the content is subject to change.

• Article numbers: In many online journals, no page numbers are provided; instead, an article ID is assigned, which replaces the page range.

• Early View / Online First: If the article is already available online but has not yet been assigned to a volume/issue, this should be explicitly indicated.

2.4 Academic & Scholary Thesis (Bachelor’s, Master’s Dissertations, Doctoral Theses) ^ top 

Academic theses are scholarly final projects completed as part of a degree programme at higher education institutions or universities. These include, in particular, Bachelor’s theses, Master’s dissertations, diploma theses, doctoral theses, and, in some cases, habilitation theses.

Such works may be either published or unpublished:

• Published works are publicly accessible in libraries, repositories, or on publishers’ platforms.
• Unpublished works are usually available only as a printed copy or PDF within the university archive.

The citation format depends on whether the thesis is publicly accessible. Academic theses are not considered "grey literature" but constitute independent scholarly sources with clear authorship.

Academic theses should not be used as primary sources in scholarly publications.

For final projects, it is essential to specify the exact type (e.g. "Unpublished Master’s Dissertation") as well as the awarding institution. If a DOI or persistent link is available, this should be used in preference to other identifiers.

Special considerations and recommendations

• Unpublished works should be explicitly identified, e.g. "Unpublished Bachelor’s Thesis, University of XYZ".

• Institution names should be given in full, optionally including faculty or department.

• Published doctoral theses by a publisher: If issued by an academic publisher (e.g. Springer, transcript), the same rules as for monographs apply.

• Institution as editor: If the work was published under the name of an organisation, this may be stated additionally (supervisors are not listed in the citation).

2.5 Grey Literature (Reports, Internal Studies, White Papers) ^ top 

Grey literature refers to publications that are not issued through the traditional book or journal market and are often produced by institutions, government bodies, research consortia, companies, or NGOs. These include, for example:

• Research reports and studies
• Internal evaluations and working documents
• White papers and technical reports
• Policy papers, position statements, guidelines
• Conference proceedings without a formal publisher

Grey literature is often not subject to peer review but may still be highly relevant for applied research, policy advice, professional discourse, and current data sources. The key criteria are whether the source can be traced (author, date, title, and, if applicable, link) and whether it is publicly accessible.

Depending on the document type, authorship, and publication format, such sources may fall into categories similar to reports, monographs, or academic theses. When citing, particular attention should be paid to clear attribution of author(s) or editor(s) and to providing precise bibliographic details.

Special considerations and recommendations

• Institutional author vs. publisher: If, for example, a ministry issues the report but a research institute prepared the content, this distinction should be made clear.

• Internal documents: Only cite if you had direct access. Mark in brackets: "unpublished", "internal report", or "available on request only".

• Type specification: Add the document type if not evident from the title (e.g. Policy Brief, Technical Concept, Market Analysis).

• Series information: If the document is part of a series (e.g. "Discussion Papers No. 5"), include this detail.

• Multiple authors: Even for institutional sources, check whether individual authors are credited—if so, list them before the organisation.

2.6 Articles in Newspapers, News Portals, Blogs ^ top 

Current sources such as articles from daily newspapers, news portals, or blogs can make valuable contributions to academic work—particularly when addressing societal debates, political developments, economic assessments, or recent events. These sources are not considered academic, as they are generally not peer-reviewed, are often presented in a journalistic format, and may occasionally be opinion-oriented. Nevertheless, they can be highly useful for contextual references, case analyses, up-to-date statistics, or quotations from notable individuals.

Citation is based on the journalistic authorship, publication date, and the platform (e.g. newspaper, news site, blog hosting service). In the case of blogs, the boundary with academic writing can sometimes be fluid—particularly for expert blogs, university blogs, or research blogs.

In all cases, a complete reference including the URL and, where applicable, the access date is essential, as many such contents may be dynamically altered, relocated, or removed.

Special considerations and recommendations

• Identify the author: If no individual author is named, "Editorial team" or the name of the medium may be cited as the author.

• Blog platforms: Indicate the blog name and, if relevant, the overarching platform.

• Comments or interviews: These may be cited as individual contributions if authorship and title are available.

• Print vs. online: For articles from print newspapers with an online version, prefer the online edition, as it is easier to verify and link.

• Use an archive link if the original article is no longer available or is likely to be removed.

2.7 Websites and Digital Content ^ top 

Websites are non-academic sources that can nonetheless be relevant in study and research contexts. They are often used to provide contextualisation, present current positions, outline organisational structures, provide legal information, or offer statistical data, and are frequently used in an auxiliary capacity.

Digital content differs from traditional sources in its dynamic and heterogeneous nature:

• Content is often subject to change or may not be permanently accessible.
• Authors are not always clearly identified.
• Publication dates may be missing or difficult to determine.
• Content is often produced by companies, organisations, or teams.

Correct citation should make these uncertainties transparent, use stable URLs (preferably permalinks or archive links), and include an access date if the content may change.

Not everything available online is a "website" ^ top 

The mere fact that a source is available online does not automatically mean it is a "website" in the narrow sense. For accurate citation, the determining factor is the document type—not whether the source is accessible via a web browser.

Many online contents are formally assigned to other source types:

• PDF files published as a report, study, white paper, standard, or brochure are classified as grey literature, monograph, or guideline.
• Articles with identified authorship and publication date, in editorial formats, are typically blog posts, news articles, or commentary pieces.
• Contributions in online journals, even if freely accessible, belong to the category of scholarly journal articles.
• Theses in a university repository, regardless of file format, are classified as academic theses.
• Legal texts, court rulings, or standards available online are regarded as legal sources or normative documents.

Whether a document is displayed in HTML, PDF, or another format is secondary. The decisive questions are: What type of source is it? Who is the author? What is the content and formal structure of the document?

Special considerations and recommendations

• No identifiable author: Name the organisation as group author; avoid abbreviations or legal suffixes.

• Institutional affiliation: For governmental bodies, ministries, or NGOs, also name the platform or organisational unit.

• Missing publication date: Use "n.d." and maintain transparency.

• Title specification: Include only the title of the specific subpage cited, not the homepage.

• Web archive: If content is deleted or difficult to locate, an archive link can be added.

2.8 Social Media (Posts, Comments, Channels) ^ top 

Social media content such as posts, tweets, comments, videos, channels, or threads are dynamic, publicly accessible forms of digital communication that are increasingly used in scholarly research and analysis. These contributions often originate from individuals, organisations, media outlets, or official accounts, and their structure varies depending on the platform. While social media is not considered an academic source, it can, depending on the topic, provide empirical data, evidence of discourse, case examples, or quotations from relevant actors.

When citing, it is essential to include the author (account), the exact date of publication, the platform name, the post title or opening words, and the link to the original post. Due to the transient and changeable nature of social media, providing an access date is mandatory.

Special considerations and recommendations

• Posts without a title: Use the first 20 words of the post content as the title; if necessary, add [own description].

• Deleted content: Cite only if securely archived or documented (e.g. screenshot, archive link).

• Platform-specific formats: For TikTok, Instagram, or YouTube, the video ID or channel name may also be relevant.

• Quotations from comments or threads: Clearly indicate the context (post, comment, reply) from which the information is taken.

• Beware of fake accounts or bots: Source criticism is particularly important with social media—content may not always be reliable or authentic.

2.9 Podcasts, Videos and Audio Formats ^ top 

Podcasts, videos, audio interviews, recordings, or streamed content are multimedia sources that are gaining increasing importance in research, teaching, and science communication. They may be journalistic, documentary, or educational in nature and are often not published in written form, but are publicly accessible. Such formats originate from individuals, teams, media organisations, institutions, or educational providers and are distributed via various platforms.

Scholarly use of these sources requires precise citation, including the producer, publication date, exact title, format, and platform. When quoting or referring to specific points, time stamps or chapter markers are recommended.

Special considerations and recommendations

• Indicate the format: Always specify whether it is a podcast, video, lecture, etc.

• Distinguish producer from platform: Clearly differentiate between the content creator and the platform operator.

• Use timestamps when quoting: For precise references, include time markers such as "[00:13:47]".

• Use an archive link if the content is unlikely to remain permanently available.

• Differentiate from social media: Video formats on YouTube, etc., are not classified as social media sources, even if they are commented on or shared.

2.10 Statutes, Regulations and Legal Sources ^ top 

Legal norms - such as statutes, regulations, or administrative provisions - are not conventional literature sources, but rather primary legal sources. In academic writing, they are not cited via bibliographic details (author, publisher, year of publication) but follow a discipline-specific legal citation style.

Statutes and regulations are not included in the reference list. They are cited in full directly in the text or in footnotes, following the conventions of legal citation.

The cited statute is referred to in its current or relevant version, using the official short title, the reference in the official gazette, and, if necessary, the legal status or the relevant section/article chain.

• Example 1:

  • Full first mention in the text:
    According to §433 para. 1 of the German Civil Code (BGB), the seller is obliged to deliver the item to the buyer free from material and legal defects.

  • Subsequent mention in the text:
    Pursuant to §433 para. 2 BGB, the buyer is obliged to pay the agreed price.

  • Footnote citation (first mention):
    §433 para. 1 BGB, Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch of 2 January 2002 (BGBl. I p. 42, last amended by Art. 1 G of 16 March 2024, BGBl. I No. 92).

  • Footnote citation (subsequent):
    §433 para. 2 BGB.

• Example 2:

  • Full first mention in the text:
    Under §1 of the Austrian Commercial Code (UGB), an undertaking is any long-term organisation engaged in independent economic activity.

  • Subsequent mention in the text:
    According to §2 UGB, these conditions also apply to civil law partnerships under certain circumstances.

  • Footnote citation (first mention):
    §1 UGB, Unternehmensgesetzbuch, BGBl. I No. 120/2005 as amended by BGBl. I No. 150/2023.

  • Footnote citation (subsequent):
    §2 UGB.

2.11 Standards and Guidelines (e.g. ISO, EN, ÖNORM, DIN) ^ top 

Standards and technical guidelines are specialised professional documents that define established requirements, testing procedures, terminology, or methodologies for products, processes, or services. They are considered grey literature but are treated within the professional community - particularly in engineering, technical, and environmental sciences - as an independent category of source.

In citations, the precise standard number (including year) is crucial. An exact statement of the title, publisher, and, where applicable, access location is essential.

In some citation styles, standards are not explicitly regulated - in such cases, they follow the logic of technical reports or grey literature.

Special Considerations and Recommendations

• Use the correct standard number, including all prefixes and suffixes (e.g. "DIN EN ISO 9001:2015").

• Reproduce the title verbatim, as standards may exist in multiple identical versions.

• Refer to specific sections, e.g. "Section 4.3.2 of DIN EN ISO 14044", to increase traceability.

• For multipart standards (e.g. Part 1, Part 2...), include the exact part designation.

• For guidelines, e.g. VDI guidelines, also specify the series and number.

2.12 Maps, Plans and Visual Materials ^ top 

Maps, plans, and other geo-based or visually technical representations are independent types of sources frequently used in academic work to provide spatial, technical, or design-related illustrations. Depending on origin and format, these may include:

• topographic, thematic, or historical maps,
• architectural or construction plans,
• site plans, floor plans, flow charts, or technical sketches,
• GIS data visualisations, or
• digitally generated interactive maps.

A correct citation requires precise description of the material, authorship, version, and source - regardless of whether the map is printed, digital, or interactive.

Special Considerations and Recommendations

• For maps from specialised books or atlases, the overarching source (e.g. monograph, edited volume) should be cited where applicable.

• For self-produced maps based on OpenStreetMap, ArcGIS, or QGIS, the underlying data source must be stated.

• For official maps (e.g. cadastral, national survey), applicable legal licence notices may apply.

• If maps or plans are unpublished but included in an appendix, they should be marked accordingly ("own illustration") and numbered.

2.13 Data and Statistics ^ top 

Data and statistics are factual foundational materials and play a central role in academic work, particularly in empirical studies, comparisons, and arguments. They may originate from official sources, research projects, corporate reports, or self-collected surveys.

Typical sources include:

• Statistical agencies (e.g. Statistics Austria, Destatis, Eurostat)
• Databases of organisations (e.g. OECD, WHO, UNdata)
• Research data repositories (e.g. GESIS, Harvard Dataverse)
• Open data portals (e.g. data.gv.at, govdata.de)
• NGO or corporate reports with quantitative content

In citation practice, data and statistics are their own type of source, not merely appendices to websites or PDFs. The specific dataset, its version, and its origin must be clearly traceable.

Special Considerations and Recommendations

• References to graphically processed data (charts, interactive tools) must include a source citation.

• When using own analysis of official data, the primary source must also be cited.

• Version and publication date are crucial for academic reproducibility.

• Machine-readable data formats (JSON, XML, CSV) may also be cited - the key is to indicate who provided the data.

3 Common Sources of Error and Quality Assurance ^ top 

Accurate recording, integration, and formatting of sources is a central component of academic integrity. In practice, certain recurring sources of error frequently arise, affecting the traceability and formal correctness of academic work. The following section outlines typical problem areas and provides recommendations for quality assurance.

Key Points for Chapter 3 ^ top 

1. Formal accuracy is part of academic quality
   Incomplete, inconsistent, or poorly formatted sources undermine the credibility of the entire work.

2. Use one citation style consistently
   Mixing elements from different citation styles results in inconsistencies and formal errors.

3. Automation is no guarantee of correctness
   Reference management software and AI tools often produce incomplete or incorrect entries.

4. A manual final check is indispensable
   Every source must be reviewed before submission - regardless of whether it was recorded manually or generated automatically.

5. The regulations of the university or degree programme are binding
   Institutional requirements take precedence over general handbooks or citation guides.

3.1 Common Sources of Error ^ top 

• Incomplete or contradictory information
  Citations are incomplete or internally inconsistent, for example, different spellings of the same work in the text and in the reference list.

• Mixing of different citation styles
  Elements from different rule sets are combined, leading to inconsistent formatting - for instance, in punctuation, italics, or the sequence of details.

• Importing incorrect automatic source data
  Reference management software such as Zotero or Citavi may produce incorrect or incomplete entries - particularly for online sources, conference papers, or grey literature.

• Copy-paste issues from databases or AI tools
  Automatically generated citations often contain formal errors, missing details, or incorrect formatting.

3.2 Recommendations for Quality Assurance ^ top 

• Check the citation rules of the university / degree programme
  In the degree programmes Energy & Sustainability Management and Facility Management & Real Estate Management, APA in its current version is used. These rules are binding.

• Ensure consistency of details
  All details (authors, years, titles, publishers, etc.) must appear consistently and correctly in both in-text citations and the reference list.

• Use reference management as support, not as a replacement
  Tools such as Zotero or Citavi facilitate organisation and formatting but always require manual post-editing.

• Conduct a manual final check before submission
  Each source should be manually reviewed for completeness, formal correctness, and consistency. This is particularly important for online sources, DOIs, URLs, and specific formatting requirements.