I know this question already has a similar answer but, please bear with me. I am writing my thesis and I realize there are cases I do not know how to properly cite, as illustrated in the following scenario:
- In literature review articles, for example, the author gives a summary of an idea that has been previously discovered by other papers. Although I thoroughly read these papers before I include the idea into my thesis, who should I give credit to? The review paper from which I got the idea in the first place or the paper that discovered the idea?
- In other cases, the author gives his own educated guess. Yes, he does provide justification for his reasoning but in the end, it is clear his conclusion is only a guess-work. In my case, one famous author came up with a new theory that refute the existing one. The theory is becoming accepted by many researchers but it still holds lots of holes that, to some extends, seem like it is a backward step compared to the existing theory. When it is clear that the famous author is only making speculations to support his theory, how can I properly cite this and distance myself from the claim? I don't wanna say I believe what he says (because he cannot convince me with evidence) but I need to include his paper for completeness of my literature review.
- I know I should paraphrase the author's idea and only use quotation marks when I use word-for-word what the author said. However, how much paraphrasing should I do? I am finding myself looking for a synonym of something that clearly does not have any. And in some cases, using a synonym would actually obscure the meaning of the sentence.
- For those of you with experience, please add any other citation-related issue you would like me to take into consideration.