Milton wrote
>
> Powerpoint is a tool, not a publication. I believe it should be
> treated as you would a Skinner box or computer. In the methods
> section, you might mention its name and manufacturer and any
> "dimensions" that were pertinent to the study, just as you would any
> other piece of apparatus.
>
> Milton Steinberg
On the other hand, unlike other tools, powerpoint is _copyright_ rather
than patented, and, in fact, produces code which is copyright by Microsoft
as an integral part of the documents it creates (the code that tells
powerpoint what to "do" with the data).
My guess (and that's all it is) as to how it would be cited would be:
Microsoft Powerpoint 97 [computer software]. (1996). Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Corporation.
The original poster listed the Microsoft office package, but since
powerpoint is a stand-alone product that is bundled with Office _or_ sold
separately, it would seem more appropriate to list it alone (as, for
example, Jung's "Two Essays on Analytical Psychology" would be listed
separately from the "Collected Works of Jung."
It _is_ an interesting question, however, and I'll send an e-mail request
to Microsoft's legal department for the specific form of citation they
recommend (in APA, of course) and forward the reply to the list.
Rick
