Hi Leila,

It may be that you’re looking at an MLA citation. In MLA, the author name is followed by the page number. So when et al. is used, that could look like (Smith et al. 129)

Hi Baris,

This is a tricky issue that style guides don’t tend to get into. The purpose of using “et al.” is not to highlight anyone’s contribution as more important than that of the other authors, but simply to save space in your citations. The name of the first author listed is used just for the sake of convenience, and it’s down to the publisher and authors, not the person citing the source, to determine the order in which authors are listed. But of course, it’s not unreasonable to think the author who is directly named is receiving more direct credit for their work than those who are not named.

Nevertheless, there’s no coverage of exceptions to the rule of using “et al.” in APA, MLA, or Chicago, so it’s reasonable to assume they would advise just using “et al.” even in a case like the one you describe.

Hi John,

I don’t personally see anything offensive about that phrasing (though of course I can’t account for how others would react to it!). I wouldn’t capitalize “et al.” though; it’s a phrase rather than a name.

What about in the case of co-authorship? I’m not sure about other disciplines but in biological science journals, an asterisk is used to indicate co-authorship. And we see in the footnote the following statement: *These authors contributed equally to this work. Is the sole purpose of et al. citations simplicity or giving credit fairly? In relation to this, what would be the citation for an article that has been written by two co-authors who have contributed equally?

Thanks in advance!

Jack,
My question is similar, yet different, from Dawn’s, so I thought I’d tag along on this string:
Is it inappropriate, offensive, etc. greet email recipients with “Ladies, Gentlemen, Et al., …”?

I understand & agree that naming some and not others is offensive.
However, I lead a staff of professionals with a sprinkling of diversity, and would like to counter the minority that are not so accepting. So, I would like to promote an inclusive environment in little ways.

Hi Dawn,

It’s usually best to avoid this usage of et al., as it may be considered rude (especially as it involves naming one of your addressees but not others). If it’s too unwieldy to list all names, an appropriate general term should be used, e.g. “Dear colleagues” or similar.

Hi Mehdi,

Usually it’s best to avoid this kind of phrasing, e.g. by changing it to “In a study by Smith et al.” or “Smith et al. (2015) found that . . .”. However, where this is not possible, the correct option is “Smith et al.’s study.”