Problem: For many editors, readers, and authors, the invariant format is a convenience. A fixed format means that authors do not need to work through different possible ways of organizing or presenting ideas, while editors and readers do not have to struggle to understand unfamiliar or unexpected presentation formats. Neither the writer nor the reader needs to think carefully about how the ideas are connected. As Bazerman observes, the standardized format eliminates the need for writers to think through the organization of their materials; they no longer "have to establish overt transitions and continuity among the parts" (SWK, 260). A standardized format also streamlines access to meaning for consumers. Soothed by the predictable connection between the sections, readers find the coherence that they expect to find. (Thompson, 2004, p. 49)
Do you agree with this more positive assessment of APA? Disagree? Why might using APA be problematic if it means "authors do not need to work through different possible ways of organizing or presenting ideas" (Thompson, 2004, p. 49)?