cited with

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "cited with" is not correct in standard written English.
It is typically used incorrectly; the correct phrase would be "cited for" or "cited in." Example: "The author was cited for their groundbreaking research in the field."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Science

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

51 human-written examples

So is Singleton, though at other times he is cited with a punctilious courtesy.

The New Yorker

Coulson's supposed motto, "Get the story, no matter what", is cited with a curled lip.

The Guardian

"It's not often you hear Bismarck cited with approval in a synagogue".

The New York Times

Their articles were also cited with regard to the $3.8 billion accounting error that WorldCom reported last year.

The New York Times

This month, Al Taqwa was cited with Al Barakaat by the United States in an order blocking their assets.

The New York Times

The Coast Guard said in a news release that the three had been cited with security violations.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

7 human-written examples

Among these ten genes, four are co-cited with 'glioma' on PubMed and five with 'cancer'cancer

BMC Genomics

Many passenger genes are co-cited with some of these regulators in previous studies (Table 4).

BMC Systems Biology

The higher the number, the more often the article was co-cited with the known study.

BMC Medical Research Methodology

In addition, many passenger genes are co-cited with other candidate regulators (PLAU, BDNF, FOSL1) in previous publications.

BMC Systems Biology

In our setting, we look at genes that are co-cited with the receptors and ligands from the DLRP database.

Bioinformatics

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Replace "cited with" with a stronger verb choice for clearer meaning: 'The study referenced similar findings.'

Common error

Avoid using "cited with" in academic papers or professional reports. Although frequently found, it's grammatically incorrect. Opt for "cited in" to indicate where something is mentioned or "cited for" to specify the reason for the citation.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "cited with" functions as a verb phrase + preposition, typically used to indicate an association or connection. However, Ludwig AI marks it as grammatically incorrect, advising against its use in formal contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

38%

Science

36%

Wiki

26%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Social Media

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "cited with" is frequently encountered across various sources, including news media, scientific publications, and wikis. However, Ludwig AI identifies it as grammatically incorrect, recommending alternatives like "cited in" or "cited for" to ensure grammatical precision. While "cited with" aims to associate elements, its incorrect usage detracts from its effectiveness, particularly in formal writing. Therefore, opting for grammatically sound alternatives is advisable.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

referenced with

Replaces "cited" with "referenced", maintaining a similar meaning but emphasizing the act of referring to something.

associated with

Uses "associated" to show a connection or relationship between two things.

identified with

Uses "identified" to highlight that something is being recognized or distinguished along with something else.

mentioned with

Uses "mentioned" instead of "cited", suggesting a less formal or detailed reference.

linked with

Employs "linked" to emphasize a direct connection or association.

included with

Employs "included" to indicate that something is part of a group or list alongside something else.

coupled with

Substitutes "cited" with "coupled", suggesting a close or intertwined relationship.

listed with

Substitutes "cited" with "listed", indicating a simple enumeration of items.

presented with

Replaces "cited" with "presented", indicating that something is being shown or offered alongside something else.

named with

Replaces "cited" with "named", suggesting that something is being identified along with something else.

FAQs

How can I correctly use "cited" in a sentence?

Use "cited in" to indicate the source where something is mentioned (e.g., "The data was cited in the report") or "cited for" to specify the reason for the citation (e.g., "The author was cited for their innovative research").

Is "cited with" grammatically correct?

No, "cited with" is generally considered grammatically incorrect. It's better to use phrases like "cited in" or "cited for" depending on the context.

What are some alternatives to "cited with"?

Depending on the context, you can use alternatives such as "referenced in", "mentioned in", or "associated with".

What's the difference between "cited in" and "cited for"?

"Cited in" indicates the source where information is found (e.g., "The study was cited in The New York Times"), while "cited for" specifies the reason for the citation (e.g., "The researcher was cited for their contributions to the field").