A practical guide to writing titles, abstracts, and keywords (TAK)

Titles, abstracts, and keywords often bear the brunt of neglect in academic writing, an oversight that ranks among the most foolish missteps in one’s career. Although an article, as well as a research proposal, commences with a title, an abstract, and typically five keywords, the attention to these three components usually comes only after completing the entire text. In fact, Titles, Abstracts, and Keywords (TAK) are the final elements addressed in your article and research proposal. However, when preparing for a talk, be it a proposal or a request from organizers, TAK becomes the initial focus.

There are three paramount reasons why crafting exceptional TAKs is crucial. Firstly, you aim to be read: TAK is the preliminary content people peruse to determine whether the reading, or potential purchase, is worthwhile. Secondly, securing funding is a goal: TAK is the sole aspect of your proposal accessible to all individuals handling your submission. Thirdly, participation in a conference is sought after: TAK is the evaluative material organizers use to select conference participants.

The sequence in which you choose to compose titles, abstracts, and keywords is flexible. What remains essential is recognising that each TAK element serves a distinct function. Understanding these functions is imperative for selecting the right words and ensuring effective wording.

1. Titles: catching the reader’s attention

According to LaPlaca, Lindgreen & Vanhamme (2018), “the purpose of the title is to get the reader excited about the manuscript and to invite the reader into the manuscript” (p. 203). This implies two main rules of conduct when creating a title for your paper.

1. Your title should be captivating, catching the reader’s attention in an elegant manner.

2. Your title must be clear, that is, it has to avoid ambiguity, representing the main feature of the text clearly.

Titles are the most individual features of any academic writing. Neglecting the two main rules may lead to the paper’s ineffectiveness. Fewer people might read it because it appears uninteresting or boring (violating the first rule) or because it does not seem to address what they need (violating the second rule). Always be cautious of potential misalignments between the title and contents.

While no general rules beyond the two rules of conduct can be prescribed for titles, consider six pieces of advice.

1. Keep your title short; avoid two or three lines of text, which can be overwhelming.

2. consider using the title-subtitle format for a balance between catchiness and clarity, but be mindful of the title’s descriptiveness without its subtitle.

3. Avoid starting a title with an explicit quotation, especially in another language, as it may complicate referencing.

4. Be elegant both semantically and syntactically; use fitting words and phrasing, avoiding slang or inappropriate language.

5. Always think of potential readers: what would attract them to purchase your article, listen to your talk, or be positively receptive to your text?

6. Feel free to think outside the box and be unique and clever, but ensure the title speaks to your paper and aligns with it, avoiding excessiveness.

2. Abstracts: explaining your aim and procedure compellingly

An abstract serves as a thoughtful summary of your text, whether it be an article, a talk, or a proposal. It functions as a bridge between a summary and a blurb, offering editors, evaluators, organizers, scholars, and various readers a well-grounded, specific, and accurate overview of your work. Much like a summary, it provides a concise yet precise depiction of your text, elucidating your objectives, methods, and contextual references. Similar to a blurb, it presents a compelling snapshot, aiming to persuade potential readers to delve into the full content.

LaPlaca, Lindgreen & Vanhamme (2018) underscore that “the abstract serves as an advertisement for the article” (p. 203). It must generate enough interest to justify the article’s consumption, highlighting elements such as the research question, research framework, methodology, and/or findings. Therefore, a successful abstract performs a dual role:

1. It accurately describes your work

2. It promotes both your work and yourself.

Crafting a reliable and accurate summary of your text is the initial step, followed by refining and shaping it to emphasize aspects that enhance the promotion of your research.

Two main types of abstracts exist, with the descriptive abstract more common in the humanities and the informative abstract prevalent in the hard sciences. Descriptive abstracts offer an accurate summary to help readers decide whether to read the entire text, resembling the structure of an article introduction: context, research question, procedural steps. While the structure is similar, abstracts have the added function of promotion. Informative abstracts, on the other hand, follow the IMRAD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), commonly preferred in research proposals, particularly in continental Europe.

Laplaca, Lindgreen & Vanhamme (2018) emphasise the abstract’s function, stating that “the abstract must emphasize the research’s findings and its contributions to conceptual perspectives, methodological considerations, and/or managerial practices, among others.” Consequently, an abstract should be concise, clear, concrete, and appealing. Always remember that the abstract is your prime opportunity to promote your research, showcasing how it contributes to the debate, opens new perspectives, resolves enduring problems, or has interdisciplinary implications. Yet, caution is needed to avoid overselling.

Consider four key pieces of advice when crafting an abstract.

1. Ensure that you meet reader expectations, adhering to procedural steps if it’s an article abstract. For talks, discuss all points mentioned in your abstract.

2. Apply the purchase test to gauge clarity and persuasiveness. Imagine a scholar without a journal subscription considering spending money; is your abstract convincing enough for a purchase?

3. For articles or proposals, write the abstract last to accurately represent your text’s structure and content.

4. Seek feedback from colleagues to assess persuasiveness and whether they would invest in reading the entire article.

3. Keywords: indicating precisely what you are talking about

Keywords play a crucial role as indexing entries, profiling your text and categorising it within a set of thematically-linked items that address a similar topic. While their function as metadata might make them seem less significant, keywords are, in fact, pivotal for both journal articles and research proposals. In the context of journal articles, they contribute to journal indexing and attract potential readers. In the case of research proposals, keywords are essential for referee selection.

Strategic thinking is imperative when dealing with keywords. In proposals, your choice of keywords determines the referee assigned, and in articles, they influence readability for different audiences. Consider the classes of experts who will handle your paper. Act accordingly to facilitate that your paper reaches the desired audience.

One overarching rule is to be specific but not overly so when selecting keywords. This general guideline is complemented by six pieces of advice.

1. Avoid using only general terms such as “metaphysics” or “existence”; incorporate one or two general terms to position your paper in the domain.

2. Refrain from using overly specific terms.

3. Use philosophers’ names as keywords only if they are the primary subject of your article or research proposal.

4. Avoid terms in foreign languages if there is a technical equivalent in the main language of your text.

5. Use keywords to describe the most significant features of your paper, thinking about what terms an interested reader might use to find it.

6. Adopt a series of keywords that progress gradually from the general domain to the specific features of your paper.

Reference

Karin De Boer, Guidelines on Writing Articles. KU Leuven, CS 2020.

Peter LaPlaca, Adam Lindgreen, & Joëlle Vanhammed, “How to Write Really Good Articles for Premier Academic Journals”. Industrial Marketing Management 68 (2018): 202-209.

Helen Sword, Stylish Academic Writing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012.

“How to Write a Research Question“, The Writing Center of George Mason University (consulted on 19 October 2022).

©️ Nicola Polloni
Latest update: October 2024