學術傳播常常循著「引用文獻」(citation)和「同儕評閱」(peer review)之兩階段軸線發展，兼具量與質。其中引用文獻分析所賴以建立的引文(註釋)格式問題，基本上是一種植基於質化運用上的量化研究，也日此引文格式之探討應為解決引文索引爭議的核心。唯有詳細嚴謹的學術引文規範以及妥善運用的引文文獻分析技術，方足以架構良性的學術傳播環境。本研究除了探討引文分析較為人知曉的幾項爭議外，更探析引文格式，尤以APA、Chicageo(Turabian)、MLA三者對於引文分析之效益及其影響。當涉及學術規範「統一」、引文格式本身特性、二次引用、引文計數之公平合理等問題時，引文分析所及之應用研與引文格式間之關係，自然無法被漠視，毫無疑問的是引文格式是學術傳播與出版之基石。 Scholarly communication nearly always traces its development by examining the uses of citation and peer review in which have become the two mainstreams of publication. It is a compound of qualitative and quantitative features that to mainstreams have kept intact. Nevertheless, the citation analysis based on a particular documentation style has become a quantitative research of quality. A study of citation format or documentation style should be treated as the core issue of citation indexing lies. It is believed that a well-established and disciplinary citation analysis technique with documentation style will be of a fundamental rules for developing the decent scholarly communication environment. This article explores the efficiencies and influences of three notable styles, the APA, the Chicago (Turabian) and the MLA. On their problems of citation analysis. While there are problems on documentation styles unification, features, indirect source citing and even for the fairness of citation count, there is the solution that documentation style is the fundamentals of scholarly communication and of scholarly publishing.
