Every aspect of scientific writing has been examined, but the title is the least studied component of manuscripts (Goodman et al. 2001, Soler 2007) even though some describe the title as the most important element (Garg 2017). When scientists are scanning literature to decide what to read, the title is often the only thing they look at (Stapleton et al. 1995). Useful guidelines for titles are often difficult to locate. The Journal of Wildlife Management (JWM ) has been published since 1937, but guidelines for titles were not provided to authors until they appeared in the ninth issue: “The title should be concise and descriptive preferably not more than 10 words, as an aid in bibliography” (Storer 1945:back matter). The current guidelines for authors are similar: “Titles should not exceed 10 words unless doing so forces awkward construction. Do not use scientific names in the title except for organisms that have easy to confuse common names, or lack them altogether” (Cox et al. 2019:30–31). Merrill and Knipps (2014) reviewed JWM titles and provided more guidance to authors creating titles, but are JWM guidelines about titles current with the available literature? The purpose of this editorial is to provide insight into the creation of good titles for manuscripts.

Characteristics of Titles

Titles can convey different things including the topic, study design (Grant 2013), methods, results (Goodman et al. 2001), and conclusions (Katz 2009), and should attract attention and inform referees, editors, and other readers that the manuscript provides new knowledge (Spector 1994, Stapleton et al. 1995, Grant 2013, Merrill and Knipps 2014, Garg 2017). Titles should be straightforward, clear, and adequately describe the contents of the manuscript (Stapleton et al. 1995). Authors should always check with the journal where they are submitting the manuscript for guidelines on titles (Stapleton et al. 1995, Sharp 2002).

Short titles are recommended by many (Spector 1994, Stapleton et al. 1995, Katz 2009, Subotic and Mukherjee 2014, Cox et al. 2019); however, the relationship between title length and citations is not unanimous among previous investigations. Subotic and Mukherjee (2014) reported that shorter titles (~10.4 words) were cited more than longer titles but that impact factor of the journal had a more pronounced effect. Jacques and Sebire (2010) and Habibzadeh and Yadollahie (2010) reported citations were correlated with longer titles. Rostami et al. (2014) reported that there was no correlation between title length and citation rate for >300 titles in 2007.

Titles should include key words. Words in titles are used in indexing, an important part of being able to successfully locate manuscripts (Soler 2007, Merrill and Knipps 2014). Some claim that readers scan titles quickly and are drawn to the beginning and end of the title, so key words should be placed in those 2 locations (Spector 1994, Yassa 2014) to make the important words stand out (Stapleton et al. 1995). Authors can improve search engine optimization by including well‐considered key words in the title and repeating them in other sections of the manuscript (abstract, key word fields, subheadings, figure and table captions; Krausman et al. 2016). Rostami et al. (2014) reported that the use of different words in the key words and the title is related to higher citation rates.

Authors should decide on the type of title for their manuscript. Jamali and Nikzad (2011) classified titles as declarative (i.e., indicates results of the work), descriptive (i.e., states the topic but not results), and interrogative (i.e., asks a question in the title). They also reported that declarative titles were cited less than descriptive titles. Paiva et al. (2012) categorized title types as those that included methods and those that included results and reported that results‐based titles are cited more than methods‐based titles.

Many references suggest that authors avoid placing locations in titles. Titles that reference specific geographical regions or specific study sites are not cited as much as papers with broader titles (Jacques and Sebire 2010, Paiva et al. 2012, Fox and Burns 2015).

Others suggest that authors avoid split titles (i.e., titles with colons or semi‐colons; Day 1994, Sharp 2002, Soler 2007, Paiva et al. 2012) because both parts do not relay new information, the second part is often dropped during indexing (Sharp 2002), and they were not cited as much as those that were not split (Hartley 2007). Other researchers suggests that manuscripts with split titles have higher citation rates than manuscripts that do not (Spector 1994, Jacques and Sebire 2010, Rostami et al. 2014).

Most JWM articles involve a study species and authors need to consider whether they will include the common name in the title. Fox and Burns (2015) reported that papers in Functional Ecology that included genus or species in the title were cited less often than those that did not. In contrast, the common name of the study species is likely to be a key word for the article's discoverability and including it in the title will increase search engine optimization (Krausman et al. 2016).

JWM Title Characteristics and Citations

Merrill and Knipps (2014) examined 960 JWM titles (volumes 73–77) and reported that 96% were descriptive with a mean word count of 11.5. Methods were mentioned 4% of the time and locations were stated in 35% of the titles. In more recent volumes, these data have only changed slightly. We examined 514 articles from JWM volumes 78–81; 83% were descriptive and the mean word count was 11.2. Methods were mentioned in 19%, results in 15%, and locations in 30% of all manuscript titles. Additionally, we looked at the use of split titles. In our data set, 15% used split titles.

We further assessed whether title characteristics were associated with number of citations. We calculated number of citations for each article published in volumes 78–81 (as of Apr 2020). We used a log‐linear regression with a Poisson distribution for the response variable (number of citations) because it was skewed count data. We accounted for time since publication by including it as a predictor variable in each analysis because older manuscripts have had more time to accumulate citations. As expected, time since publication predicted number of citations in all analyses (all P  < 0.001). After accounting for time since publication, we did not find a relationship between number of citations and title word count (P  = 0.552), or whether results (P  = 0.739) or location (P  = 0.526) were mentioned in the title. Titles that mentioned methods (P  < 0.001) and split titles (P  = 0.032) had a greater number of citations than those that did not. For a paper published on 1 January 2014, the predicted citations for a paper with methods in the title was 12.8, whereas papers without methods in the title were predicted to have 11 citations. This is likely because many papers with methods in the title are not species‐specific and can apply to a wide range of taxa. For a paper published on 1 January 2014, having a split title increased the predicted citations from 11 to 12.

We conducted additional analyses to investigate whether including a common name in the title was related to citations. We first compared citation rate of titles with common names to those without (no name or higher taxonomic group) and titles that mentioned the common name of the genus or species were cited less than those that did not (P  < 0.001). This could indicate that authors should avoid presenting the name of their study species in the title by substituting more general terms such as carnivore, passerine, or amphibian. To investigate the benefit of this tactic, we looked at single‐species papers only and tested if mentioning the common name in the title was related to citations. There was no difference in citations between single‐species papers with a common name in the title and those without (P  = 0.153). Instead, it seems the difference in citations between those with common names and those without is influenced more by the applicability of the paper to a more general audience rather than a decision to keep the common name out of the title. Manuscripts that focused on multiple species or no species (e.g., analysis papers) were cited more than single‐species papers (P  < 0.001). The number of predicted citations for a paper published on 1 January 2014 was 10.6 for a single‐species paper and 15 for a multi‐species paper or a paper that did not have a study species.

Title Recommendations

Based on these data, it is time to provide updated suggestions for titles in JWM articles. Authors should be able to exceed the 10‐word limit if beneficial to their manuscript (e.g., ≤15 words). Carefully consider key words that readers interested in your work would likely use during searches and include them in the title (especially novel methods). Also, the use of colons and semi‐colons in split titles should not be discouraged as long as both parts of the title relay new information. These minor but important changes may improve the search engine optimization of JWM articles without negatively affecting citation rates. Be as thoughtful with your titles as you are with the rest of your research.

There are several specific title guidelines that JWM will maintain to match journal style and support from previous research:

• 1.

  Avoid jargon (in titles and in writing).

• 2.

  Avoid titles that are designated with numerals (e.g., Nesting habitats of birds: Part I).

• 3.

  Avoid the use of scientific names in titles.

• 4.

  Avoid using implicit words in titles (e.g., a study of …, the effect of …; Stapleton et al. 1995, Grant 2013, Merrill and Knipps 2014).

Citation rates vary by journal, impact factor of the journal, sample size, methods, the significance and availability of the journal, publication type, subject, length of title, and even gender of authors (Jacques and Sebire 2010). Even with all these variables, a well‐written title can lead to increased citations for manuscripts (Jacques and Sebire 2010). The value of the manuscript to wildlife management will continue to be the other important components of manuscripts: creativity and novelty, an appropriate design, rigor in analysis, and the quality of the presentation (Merrill and Knipps 2014, Krausman 2020). But a well‐crafted title could increase the likelihood that your work will be discovered.

中文翻译：

---

撰写有效的标题

尽管对科学写作的各个方面都进行了研究，但标题是手稿中研究最少的部分（Goodman等，  2001； Soler，  2007），尽管有人将标题描述为最重要的内容（Garg，  2017）。当科学家们在浏览文献以确定阅读内容时，标题通常是他们唯一要看的东西（Stapleton等，  1995）。有用的标题指南通常很难找到。该杂志野生动物管理（JWM）自1937年以来就已出版，但直到第九期出现时才向作者提供标题指南：“标题应简洁明了，最好不超过10个字，以帮助参考书目”（Storer  1945：返回物）。目前针对作者的指导原则是类似的：“标题不应超过10个字，除非这样做会造成笨拙的构造。除了容易混淆通用名称或完全缺乏通用名称的生物之外，请勿在标题中使用科学名称”（Cox等人，  2019：30-31）。Merrill和Knipps（2014）回顾了JWM标题，并为创建标题的作者提供了更多指导，但它们都是JWM现有文献中有关标题的指南？这篇社论的目的是为手稿的良好标题提供见解。

标题的特征

标题可以传达不同的内容，包括主题，研究设计（Grant，  2013年），方法，结果（Goodman等，  2001年）和结论（Katz，  2009年），并应引起注意，并告知裁判，编辑和其他读者该手稿提供新知识（Spector  1994，Stapleton等人 1995，Grant  2013，Merrill和Knipps  2014，Garg  2017）。标题应简单明了，并充分描述手稿的内容（Stapleton等，  1995）。作者应始终向提交手稿的期刊查询有关标题的指导原则（Stapleton等。 1995，夏普 2002）。

许多人都推荐使用短标题（Spector  1994，Stapleton等 1995，Katz  2009，Subotic和Mukherjee 2014，Cox等 2019）; 但是，在先前的调查中，标题长度和引用之间的关系并非一致。Subotic and Mukherjee（2014）报道，短标题（〜10.4个单词）比长标题被引用更多，但该期刊的影响因子具有更明显的作用。Jacques和Sebire（2010）以及Habibzadeh和Yadollahie（2010）报告的引文与更长的标题相关。Rostami等。（2014年）报告称，在2007年，> 300个标题的标题长度和引用率之间没有相关性。

标题应包含关键词。标题中的单词用于索引，这是能够成功定位手稿的重要组成部分（Soler  2007，Merrill和Knipps  2014）。一些人声称读者可以快速扫描标题并被吸引到标题的开头和结尾，因此应该将关键词放在这两个位置（Spector  1994； Yassa  2014），以使重要的单词脱颖而出（Stapleton等人，  1995）。 。作者可以通过在标题中包含经过深思熟虑的关键字并在手稿的其他部分（摘要，关键字字段，副标题，图形和表格标题； Krausman等人，2016年）中重复这些关键字来改善搜索引擎的优化 。Rostami等。（2014年）报道，关键词和标题中使用不同的词与更高的引文率有关。

作者应决定其手稿的标题类型。Jamali and Nikzad（2011）将标题分类为声明性（即，表明工作的结果），描述性（即，陈述主题但未给出结果）和疑问词（即，在标题中提出问题）。他们还报告说，陈述性标题的引用少于描述性标题。Paiva等。（2012）将标题类型分类为包括方法的标题类型和包含结果的标题类型，并报告基于结果的标题比基于方法的标题被引用更多。

许多参考文献建议作者避免在标题中放置位置。引用特定地理区域或特定研究地点的标题所引用的标题不及具有更广泛标题的论文（Jacques和Sebire  2010，Paiva等人 2012，Fox和Burns  2015）。

其他人则建议作者避免使用分开的标题（即带有冒号或分号的标题； Day  1994，Sharp  2002，Soler  2007，Paiva等人 2012），因为这两个部分都不传递新信息，第二部分在索引编制过程中经常被丢弃（Sharp  2002），但没有被引用的人没有被拆分的人（Hartley  2007）。其他研究人员认为，标题分开的手稿的引用率要比没有标题的手稿高（Spector  1994； Jacques and Sebire  2010； Rostami等人，2014）。

大多数JWM文章都涉及一个研究物种，因此作者需要考虑是否在标题中包含通用名称。福克斯和伯恩斯（Fox and Burns，2015）的报告指出，在功能生态学中，标题为属或种的论文被引用的频率低于未包含此类的论文。相比之下，研究物种的通用名称可能是该文章可发现性的关键词，并且将其包含在标题中将增加搜索引擎的优化（Krausman等人，  2016年）。

JWM 标题特征和引用

Merrill和Knipps（2014）检查了960个JWM标题（第73–77卷），并报告96％的标题具有描述性，平均单词数为11.5。提到方法的时间占4％，位置占35％。在最近的卷中，这些数据仅略有变化。我们研究了JWM 78-81卷中的514条文章；83％具有描述性，平均单词数为11.2。在所有手稿中，提到方法的占19％，结果占15％，位置占30％。此外，我们研究了分割标题的使用。在我们的数据集中，有15％使用拆分标题。

我们进一步评估了标题特征是否与引用次数相关。我们计算了第78-81卷（截至2020年4月）中每篇文章的引用次数。我们对响应变量（引用次数）使用了具有泊松分布的对数线性回归，因为它是偏斜的计数数据。由于较早的手稿有更多的时间来积累引文，因此我们在每次分析时都将其作为预测变量来考虑自出版以来的时间。正如预期的那样，自发布以来的时间预测了所有分析中的引用次数（所有P  <0.001）。在考虑了自发布以来的时间之后，我们没有发现引文数量与标题字数之间的关系（P  = 0.552）或结果是否（P = 0.739）或 标题中提到了位置（P = 0.526）。提到方法（P  <0.001）和拆分标题（P  = 0.032）的标题的引用数量要多于未引用方法的标题。对于2014年1月1日发布的论文，标题中带有方法的论文的预计被引用为12.8，而标题中没有方法的论文被预测为11被引用。这可能是因为许多标题中包含方法的论文不是特定于物种的，并且可以应用于各种分类单元。对于2014年1月1日发表的论文，标题分开将预测引用从11增加到12。

我们进行了其他分析，以调查标题中是否包含通用名称与引用有关。我们首先将具有普通名称的标题与没有普通名称的标题（没有名称或更高的分类组）的引用率进行比较，提及该属或物种的普通名称的标题的引用率要低于没有普通名称或物种的标题（P  <0.001）。这可能表明作者应避免使用食肉动物，雀形目或两栖动物等更笼统的术语在标题中显示其研究物种的名称。为了研究此策略的好处，我们仅查看了单物种论文，并测试了标题中提到的通用名称是否与引用相关。在标题中具有共同名称的单物种论文与没有（P  = 0.153）。取而代之的是，具有普通名称的人与没有普通名称的人之间的引用差异似乎更多地受到论文对更广泛受众的适用性的影响，而不是决定将普通名称排除在标题之外。与多物种或无物种有关的手稿（例如分析论文）比单物种的论文引用率更高（P  <0.001）。2014年1月1日发表的论文的预期引用次数为：单物种论文为10.6，多物种论文或没有研究物种的论文为15。

标题建议

基于这些数据，是时候为JWM文章中的标题提供更新的建议了。如果对稿件有利（例如，≤15个单词），作者应能够超过10个单词的限制。仔细考虑对您的作品感兴趣的读者在搜索过程中可能会使用的关键词，并将其包括在标题中（尤其是新颖的方法）。而且，只要标题的两个部分都传递新信息，就不应鼓励在分隔标题中使用冒号和分号。这些微小但重要的更改可能会改善JWM文章的搜索引擎优化，而不会负面影响引用率。与其他研究工作一样，对标题保持谨慎。

JWM将维护一些特定的标题准则，以匹配期刊样式和先前研究的支持：

• 1。

  避免使用行话（标题和书面形式）。

• 2。

  避免使用标有数字的标题（例如，鸟类的栖息地：第一部分）。

• 3。

  避免在标题中使用科学名称。

• 4。

  避免在标题中使用隐含词（例如，对…的研究；…的影响； Stapleton等人 1995，Grant  2013，Merrill和Knipps  2014）。

引用率因期刊，期刊的影响因子，样本量，方法，期刊的重要性和可用性，出版物类型，主题，书名长度，甚至作者的性别而异（Jacques和Sebire  2010）。即使有所有这些变量，写得好标题也可能会增加对手稿的引用（Jacques and Sebire  2010）。手稿对野生动植物管理的价值将继续是手稿的其他重要组成部分：创造力和新颖性，适当的设计，严格的分析以及演示的质量（Merrill和Knipps  2014，Krausman  2020）。但是精心设计的标题可能会增加发现您的作品的可能性。