摘要： 参考文献表的编排有多种体例形式，并且不同体例中参考文献各著录项的表达也不尽相同。由于期刊大都倾向于采用自己所特定的参考文献著录格式，因而目前已有的参考文献软件并不能给予作者很多帮助，即作者如果将其稿件由某期刊改投到另一种期刊，通常需要改动其中的参考文献表格式和正文中的相关部分。在众多的参考文献表格式中，有两种最为主要。其一是在人文科学中较为常用的哈佛体系(即著者-出版年体系)，该体系规定正文中给出引文的作者和出版年，文献书目中的引文按著者姓名的字母顺序和出版年的先后排列。另外一种主要的参考文献表是数字体系(顺序编码制)，即正文中给出引文的序号，参考文献表中的各篇文献技其在正文中出现的先后顺序排列。科技论文和医学论文多采用该种体例。本文列举了上述两种体例的格式，并对比了二者的优缺点，认为著者-出版年体系可以使学术论文的读者很方便地了解作者所引用的工作是由谁完成的，而数字体系(顺序编码制)因为简洁，从而可以使读者更为通畅地阅读论文。

Abstract: The references provided at the ends of scientific articles are printed in a variety of different styles. In addition, within each style there are many different ways of presenting the elements within them. Authors are not helped by the provision of computer- aided referencing systems because such systems encourage further individuality. Thus, when re-submitting a revised article to another journal, authors typically have to adjust their text and to re-do their references. Matters would be much simplified if there were more agre ement about which style of referencing to use. There are two major referencing styles (each with multiple- variations within them). The first of these typical of papers in the social sciences is the Harvard, or name( date )＇ system. Here, when an author＇s paper is mentioned in the text, his or her name is followed by the date of the publication. The references are listed alphabetically in the concluding reference list with the name(s) first, followed by the date. The second major referencing style (again with multiple variations within it) is to use a numbered referencing system. Here, when an author＇s paper is mentioned in the text, it is numbered. Sometimes the author＇s name is given with the number, but quite often only the number is provided. The references are the listed sequentially by number in the concluding reference list (as in this paper). Such numbered referencing is more common in medical and scientific journals. This paper (1) illustrates the effects of these two systems in practice, and (2) contrasts their advantages and disadvantages. I conclude that the name/date system is best for academic readers who are more concemed with finding out who did what, and when, and that the number system is best for readers who are perhaps less concerned with these matters and are more interested in reading accessible content.