A paper that cannot be found might as well not exist; one that is found but impenetrable rarely gets used. The good news is that discoverability and clarity are craft, not luck — and much of the advice floating around is wrong. Here is what the evidence actually supports.
Be findable: title, abstract, keywords
Search engines and databases index your title, abstract, and keywords, so those few dozen words decide whether anyone reaches your work. Put the terms readers actually search for into the title and the first sentence or two of the abstract. Make the title specific and descriptive rather than generic or coy. And choose keywords that add terms not already in the title — repeating words you have already used just wastes coverage.
One popular rule deserves a caveat: the idea that "shorter titles get cited more" is not settled. An early study suggested it; larger, cross-disciplinary analyses found the opposite or no effect once you account for the journal. So aim for clear and precise, not arbitrarily short.
Be readable
Scholarly writing has been getting harder to read. An analysis of around 700,000 biomedical abstracts (Plaven-Sigray and colleagues, 2017) found readability declining over decades, driven by rising jargon and longer sentences. Dense prose slows reuse and narrows your audience. Write in plain, direct language; lead the abstract with your key finding; cut the "science-ese." (A fair caveat: clearer writing is about reach and reproducibility — the evidence does not show it reliably earns more citations.)
Add a plain-language summary
A plain-language summary explains why your work matters to non-specialists — patients, practitioners, journalists, policymakers. Aim for a general-reader reading level, short sentences, and no unexplained jargon. More publishers and funders now expect them, and they widen reach and improve equity of access.
Be accessible to everyone
Accessibility is a real and measured gap: a 2024 audit found fewer than about 3% of scholarly PDFs met key accessibility criteria. Write descriptive alt text for figures, use proper headings and reading order, do not rely on colour alone, and provide HTML full text where possible. This helps disabled readers — and the machines that index your work.
Honest talk about "impact" tactics
Two widely repeated claims need tempering. Open access reliably increases downloads and views, but a consistent citation boost is not established. And promoting your work on social media raises attention scores, yet rigorous trials generally find it does not increase citations. Promote your work for genuine reach and engagement — not as a shortcut to a higher count.
The throughline, in the spirit of responsible assessment, is simple: write to be found, read, and understood by the people your work can help. That is impact worth the name — and it long outlasts any single metric.
