Muthana,

Article titles are important when it comes to considering impact and citation. When potential researchers are conducting a preliminary critical literature search - they will use keywords to locate the appropriate sources. Equally important to the title are the article keywords themselves. My recommendation is that your title matches your keywords - so is likely to include methodology as well. There are a few do's and don't, in my experience, related to titles:

- The main 'don't', to me, is do not be too technical/pedantic. This is an example of an early title by me. The article is not well cited. Thought that I was being 'clever'.

Whitehead, D. (2000) Naturalistic v’s reductionistic approaches to health-related practice: opposing dichotomy or symbiotic partnership? Complementary Therapies in Nursing & Midwifery 6 (3) 149-154.

- The main do's, to me, are 'keep it simple' and try 'to make it catchy'. For instance:

Whitehead, D. (2011) Health promotion in nursing: a Derridean discourse analysis. Health Promotion International 26 (1), 117-127.

There are four simple keywords/terms - health promotion, nursing, Derrida, discourse analysis - and the methodology is included.

This is an example of a 'catchy' title - but it is advised not to 'force' such a title just for the sake of it.

Whitehead D. & Russell G. (2004) How effective are health education programmes: resistance, reactance, rationality and risk? Recommendations for effective practice. International Journal of Nursing Studies 41 (2), 163-172.

The four 'R's are designed to 'stick in the mind' and remember. Readers may not have heard of all of the Rs - and so might be curious as to what they mean and how they relate/differ to each other.

Muthana,

Article titles are important when it comes to considering impact and citation. When potential researchers are conducting a preliminary critical literature search - they will use keywords to locate the appropriate sources. Equally important to the title are the article keywords themselves. My recommendation is that your title matches your keywords - so is likely to include methodology as well. There are a few do's and don't, in my experience, related to titles:

- The main 'don't', to me, is do not be too technical/pedantic. This is an example of an early title by me. The article is not well cited. Thought that I was being 'clever'.

Whitehead, D. (2000) Naturalistic v’s reductionistic approaches to health-related practice: opposing dichotomy or symbiotic partnership? Complementary Therapies in Nursing & Midwifery 6 (3) 149-154.

- The main do's, to me, are 'keep it simple' and try 'to make it catchy'. For instance:

Whitehead, D. (2011) Health promotion in nursing: a Derridean discourse analysis. Health Promotion International 26 (1), 117-127.

There are four simple keywords/terms - health promotion, nursing, Derrida, discourse analysis - and the methodology is included.

This is an example of a 'catchy' title - but it is advised not to 'force' such a title just for the sake of it.

Whitehead D. & Russell G. (2004) How effective are health education programmes: resistance, reactance, rationality and risk? Recommendations for effective practice. International Journal of Nursing Studies 41 (2), 163-172.

The four 'R's are designed to 'stick in the mind' and remember. Readers may not have heard of all of the Rs - and so might be curious as to what they mean and how they relate/differ to each other.

I believe the titles should be clear and straightforward. For reviews and research papers, it is a good practice to put the design in the title. For theoretical and conceptual papers, using catchy titles (but don't over do it) or questions could be useful.

Are there any guidelines for forming good articles titles? For example, should the methodology used in the study be included in the title? How can I make my work more visible by researchers who use search engines?

Some suggestions include:

Thank you everyone for sharing your tips and experiences, Dean Whitehead , Ahtisham Younas , and Han Ping Fung . I read somewhere that a special care should be given to the initial words as well as to the last as these are what search engines recognize most. Any ideas?!

Thanks all for the enlightening advices!

@Muthana Makki Mohammedali I think the search engines focus on the whole title and the keywords..

Mohamad-Hani Temsah , Thank you!

Hi Muthana - as far as I am aware search engines are geared towards title and keywords - and perhaps abstract. It could be keywords within the abstract? Is this what you mean by initial words. I don't think that they pick up on main text words.

Hi Dean Whitehead ,

Listing results based on keywords and abstract would work in journal databases, I believe. But would Google, Yahoo, Alta vista, etc... recognize these in a PDF file uploaded on Google Scholar, Academia or RG?

What I meant by initial words and last ones: For example, the words "Health" and "analysis" in a title like your " Health promotion in nursing: a Derridean discourse analysis", so suggests that guy's tip that I read somewhere, would be targeted by search engines rather than the words "Derridean" or "nursing".

Does that make sense?!

And yet, there is no doubt that a really catchy title attracts clicks from the inquisitive!

Have you considered identifying a few journals that you'd really like to publish in – including the top topical journals for your subject – and looking at the lists of most downloaded papers? These tend ot be displayed on the journal web sites. What is it about these papers that causes them to be downloaded? Are there any surprises in the list? I believe that (in addition to the selected keywords) key words are picked up in the title and abstract, but I cannot swear to this. It would be interesting to know.

Suzy Lidstrom , thanks! The other day I was looking at an article on Google Scholar with an impressive citation rate! I mean a really impressive rate. When I checked the works cited I found out that the researcher has referred to NINE of his own works, beside others. Self citation does have a role. However, I find it like kissing yourself in the mirror!

On the other hand, I assure you that I read less-than-average articles published in highly ranked American journals authored by some important names in the field. And I can swear to this!

Publication is not always as transparent a business that is geared to academic excellence as it claims to be. It's more like a game.

I think it is brst that you have your keywords included in the title. I also have good experience with question-type titles, for example mine was "Can food be a competitive advantage of Croatian tourism?". It turns out to be attractive..

Thanks Mirna Leko-Šimić ! That makes sense.

Muthana Makki Mohammedali self citation is an entirely different issue, of course, but also an important one – I guess that almost everyone needs to refer to some of their earlier work when they have been working in research for a while because one piece of research will often provide the groundwork for a later study. Nevertheless, I agree with the message that I believe you wish to convey – massive self-citation undesirable (and often pitiful). Returning to the topic of the thread, though, careful choice of keywords and making sure that they appear in the title is, of course, vital for attracting the readers who are likely to cite your work. If, however, you wish your work to become more widely known so that others engaged in similar research will recognise your name and seek you out at conferences, then you might consider a rather broader choice of keywords.

Here is a thought, though: Rather than asking whether you should include the methodology as a keyword, perhaps you could take a step back to consider what choice of keywords would broaden the results when you are searching for papers that are likely to stimulate fresh ideas or stretch your knowledge. Would the use of some of these keywords be preferable if your aim was to learn from people in fields adjacent to your own?

Follow

Suzy Lidstrom ,

REPLY: " everyone needs to refer to some of their earlier work when they have been working in research for a while because one piece of research will often provide the groundwork for a later study". Well...I need to think about that!

REPLY: " you might consider a rather broader choice of keywords." Umm..I was thinking that zooming in rather than zooming out would make the title stand out. Thanks for the tip!

REPLY: " take a step back to consider what choice of keywords would broaden the results".

Thank you Suzy, indeed. These are the tips of a professional!

Joshua O. Ighalo , thanks!

One journal's requirements mentioned that the title should not contain the key words. Does this make any sense?