Citation Management 101 – Mendeley

I’d intended to continue the Citation Management 101 Series with a post on RefWorks, and I will, but I’ve decided to focus first on Mendeley and return to RefWorks later. This is purely for pragmatic reasons; I’ve taken an RA position over the summer with someone who uses Mendeley, so it’s become important for me to learn to use the program quickly. I’m now in the beginning stages of the position so I’m still teaching myself to use it, and I may return and tweak this blog post later with any new insights I gain from using Mendeley more heavily over the summer. For now, I’ll share with you the insights I’ve gained from my research and basic use of the program so far.


I am impressed with how user-friendly Mendeley is – it was easy to sign up and install the program, and the bookmarklet is a very quick install as well. The layout is intuitive and this makes it quite easy to navigate. Additionally, their video tutorials are very clear and comprehensive, and contain all the information needed to get started. This initial ease of use is a major asset for less confident computer users, or those who are strapped for time.


Mendeley is free up to 2GB of storage; for further storage there are charges that vary by plan from $65-$155 per year, and many university libraries, including Western’s, have institutional plans that grant you extra storage space, so check out your library’s offerings. What this means is that if you use the free version your usage needn’t be tied to a particular school, whereas if you need to use the extra storage afforded by your school’s library it may be.


Having reviewed Zotero first, it’s difficult for me not to write this as a comparison of the two, and indeed they have many features in common. They both store and organize your information, retrieve metadata, and generate citations and references. In both cases new users begin by installing a desktop application in a similar fashion and can choose to download additional plug-ins for word processors and web browsers that make the service even more efficient. They are both among the most popular and well reviewed citation management tools.


I wanted to highlight a couple of major differences though. Mendeley stores your data on their servers rather than on your computer; this means they have access to all of your information. It also has many social media features that Zotero doesn’t have. Both of these are potential privacy concerns, though it’s admittedly likely that the average user wouldn’t mind either. I want to emphasize though that, as with all social media, it’s important to check your privacy settings and decide what you’re comfortable with sharing – I wasn’t comfortable with some of the default settings and was able to edit my profile and privacy settings to something I am more comfortable with.


I think I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that Mendeley is owned by Elsevier. Elsevier is an academic publishing company that is well-known among librarians and academics because of controversial business practices. In theory this may not affect the average user, but I raise this as a point here for two reasons: firstly, because Mendeley data is stored on their servers, meaning that Elsevier has access to that information; and second, because by using the program one supports it by contributing to the social media component of the service. Consequently, if you are concerned about ethical business practices – particularly of those who have access to your data – I suggest you look further into the issue and decide your own level of comfort. (I’d recommend starting here. And as always, please don’t hesitate to contact me for help with finding additional resources.) Personally, for these reasons I’m more comfortable using Zotero, but as I’ve said the project I’m working on uses Mendeley, and I’ve been happy to learn to use it in order to teach those who choose it. As I think it’s important to help users find relevant information and let them make decisions for themselves, so I will leave this one up to you, reader!


As always, if you have any thoughts or opinions to share, please do so!

Citation Management 101 Series

Because I’ve found that writing helps me learn more about things than I might otherwise, and because I’m interested in learning more about citation management tools, I’ve decided to write a short series of posts presenting an introduction to some of the most popular tools. I initially thought I’d only write one post, but it became quite long so quickly that I realized I’d need to divide it up.

As I post new entries, I’ll edit this post to add links here.

(Edit – Here is the first entry, stay tuned for more! Citation Management 101 – Zotero)


I’ll write these posts from two perspectives: first, as a student myself; second, as someone in the LIS field. I aim to synthesize these perspectives into something that will be useful for both my fellow students and LIS peers. Readers may want to skip or skim parts that are less relevant to their interests – I promise not to be offended!

This series will attempt to tackle each resource in an introductory, 101 capacity. As such I will primarily discuss features for basic rather than advanced users. I’ve chosen to do this for two reasons.

Firstly, I am new to each of these tools, and this essentially makes me a basic user of each. I do hope to use each of these programs in a more in-depth way with my assignments in the upcoming semester in order to get a better feel for them, at which time I will be able to provide more in-depth discussion, but at this time I don’t think I can offer a fair or objective in-depth assessment.

And second, I expect that realistically most users are likely to only use basic features. My suspicion is that most students will prefer something that is easy to learn in the beginning, and may be willing to learn more advanced aspects of their chosen tools later in the game. If I’m correct, ease of use of basic features may be more important than functionality of the more advanced features.

I also won’t attempt instructions or tutorials due to space limitations; instead I will link to ones already online that I’ve found useful.


I want to start with a simple question – why use citation management tools?

This is a question I asked myself when I first learned of RefWorks during my undergraduate education. A librarian teaching research skills to my class explained that many students found RefWorks very useful and seemed to think highly of it, but she also admitted that some students had difficulty using it. After class, a few of my classmates told me that they had tried it and found that it hadn’t worked for them. By that point in my academic career I’d already learned to write out my own citations, and had developed techniques for organizing them. I didn’t see the point in taking the time to learn to use a tool which might not actually work when I could continue to write out citations accurately myself.

Fast forward to present day – I am now a busy graduate student, and the amount of writing I’ve needed to produce has greatly exceeded that which I needed to at the time. Furthermore, I often need to refer back to the same important works for multiple assignments and classes. Suddenly, citation management is seeming more and more like a good idea. For those working on a thesis or a dissertation, I imagine citation tools would be invaluable.
Additionally, my experience is that most students find citations to be one of the less interesting parts of essay writing, and for some they are particularly challenging; these students could certainly benefit from a good citation management tool regardless of what level of education they are pursuing.


So what’s out there?

Some basic research uncovers mountains of tools. (Just for fun, I challenge you to check out this Wikipedia article and not become overwhelmed.) I plan to discuss those that are most popularly used in my neck of the woods, and welcome comments with suggestions.

Stay tuned for my first post about Zotero.


Do you use a citation management tool? Why or why not? Leave a comment and tell me about it.