"references for" vs "references of"

Question

"references for" vs "references of"

Both "references for" and "references of" are correct, but they are used in different contexts. "References for" is used when mentioning sources that support or provide evidence for a statement, while "references of" is used when referring to the sources that belong to or are associated with something.

Last Updated: March 19, 2024

This phrase is used when providing sources that support or provide evidence for a statement. It indicates the sources that are being referred to for validation or support.

Examples:

The article includes references for all the data presented.
Can you provide references for the claims you are making?
She always includes references for her research findings.
The book contains references for further reading.
The professor asked for references for the arguments presented in the paper.

Alternatives:

citations for
sources for
evidence for
supporting documents for
backing for

This phrase is used when referring to the sources that belong to or are associated with something. It indicates the sources that are connected to a particular entity or subject.

Examples:

The references of the book were carefully checked.
The references of the study were listed at the end of the report.
He examined the references of the article to verify the information.
The references of the project were diverse and comprehensive.
The references of the presentation were outdated.

Alternatives:

sources of
belongings of
associations of
connections of
affiliations of

Answer 1

references for

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

Answer 2

references of

This phrase is correct but less commonly used in English.

"references for" vs "references of"

references for

references of

Related Comparisons