I am writing an analysis paper (not related to title), and need to introduce someone with a doctorate in English. Do I write "Doctor [name]" or do I use a suffix?

  • Or another option, he is a professor, should I use "Professor[name]," or something similar? – MisterCrazy8 Sep 16 '12 at 20:02
  • Do you mean the worst video game ever called Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? – RiMMER Sep 16 '12 at 20:04
  • 2
    In what sense are you "introducing" Dr. Jekyll in your paper? Are you simply naming him as an author of a work to which you refer, are you referring to him by name in the body of the paper, or what? ... If you could give us the sentence where you "introduce" him it would help. – StoneyB on hiatus Sep 16 '12 at 20:04
  • @StoneyB the paper is on another topic, however I noticed that was on my list of works cited, therefore I felt it would make a catchy question title. This is for a statement in an analysis of the book, How to Read a Novel Like a Professor. – MisterCrazy8 Sep 16 '12 at 20:08
  • @MisterCrazy8: As an aside, your clarifying comments have been rather interesting. If you decide to ask more questions at EL&U in the future, I suggest you provide much more information up front, being a bit more exact about what your looking for, and more informative about why you are asking. (That effort is almost always appreciated by the community; it also helps prevent the question from starting off in several different directions.) – J.R. Sep 16 '12 at 22:13

If the choices are something like

  • ...as discussed by Dr Hiram B Peabody in his paper1...
  • ...as discussed by Hiram B Peabody PhD in his paper1...
  • ...as discussed by Hiram B Peabody in his paper1...

1 Reference to paper in a footnote

then you need to follow the editorial guidelines of the publication where your own paper will appear.

My inclination is not to include the qualification at all, because it interrupts the text and it should appear in the citation. It goes without saying, surely, that anyone you cite would be worthy of a citation and you don't need to put that evidence in the text.

...as discussed by Hiram B Peabody in his paper1...

1 Peabody, H B. PhD 1975. A study of the use of adjectival phrases in the works of Shakespeare. University of Alaska, Anchorage. 83 p.

But this may not follow the expected form for your own publication.

  • Under normal circumstances, I would not use the title, however I need to give the impression that the author is both credible, and an authority on the topic in question. By using his title, it appears as if I believe this to be true. – MisterCrazy8 Sep 16 '12 at 20:16
  • For those familiar with psychology, I am framing the statement to make the author appear more credible to audience. – MisterCrazy8 Sep 16 '12 at 20:17
  • "I'm just gonna' wing it." I do, however, appreciate your answer @Andrew Leach. – MisterCrazy8 Sep 16 '12 at 20:33
  • 2
    FWIW, I would consider Peabody to be considerably more trustworthy than Doctor Peabody, Ph.D (other things being equal): the latter is reminiscent of small ads trying to sell you something. – Tim Lymington Sep 16 '12 at 21:37
  • 1
    @MisterCrazy8: If you're trying to bolster credibility, I don't think the reference/citation is the place to do it. Instead of trying to sneak in the "Dr." prefix, try something like: Hiram B. Peabody, who has published several papers on the subject, says..., or maybe: Hiram B. Peabody, who teaches English at the University of New Amsterdam, claims that... Two reasons: (1) the PhD can be inferred from that sort of introduction; (2) the PhD by itself doesn't necessarily make him an expert on the topic at hand. – J.R. Sep 16 '12 at 22:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.