User Tools

Site Tools


title

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
title [2019/10/06 09:06]
floyd
title [2019/10/06 09:07] (current)
floyd
Line 16: Line 16:
 "​Reading the entrails of chickens: molecular timescales of evolution and the illusion of precision"​ is memorable but a bit hyperbolic. "​Molecular dating: ape bones agree with chicken entrails"​ seems to springboard off of this and have fun with the symbolism. ​ "​Reading the entrails of chickens: molecular timescales of evolution and the illusion of precision"​ is memorable but a bit hyperbolic. "​Molecular dating: ape bones agree with chicken entrails"​ seems to springboard off of this and have fun with the symbolism. ​
  
-"The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property"​ may seem like an odd title to include here. It is not a stellar title. However, the author spends the first part of the introduction talking about the title and concludes "An obscure title can also have a latent function: to keep one from assuming that the title truly speaks for itself, and thus to make it necessary to elucidate one’s intent." ​It is not advisable to purposefully engineer an obscure title. ​+"The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property"​ may seem like an odd title to include here. It is not a stellar title. However, the author spends the first part of the introduction talking about the title and concludes "An obscure title can also have a latent function: to keep one from assuming that the title truly speaks for itself, and thus to make it necessary to elucidate one’s intent." ​However, it is not advisable to purposefully engineer an obscure title. ​
  
 Avoid a title that is overly specific as well. Including the scientific name of the organism, the geographic location of study, or method details in the title makes it sound overly specific and not relevant to the reader. "RFLP variation and null alleles in //Acipenser baerii// sturgeons of the Yenisei River basin" will not get as much readership or interest as "Gene flow between fragmented populations along a disrupted freshwater corridor"​. ​ Avoid a title that is overly specific as well. Including the scientific name of the organism, the geographic location of study, or method details in the title makes it sound overly specific and not relevant to the reader. "RFLP variation and null alleles in //Acipenser baerii// sturgeons of the Yenisei River basin" will not get as much readership or interest as "Gene flow between fragmented populations along a disrupted freshwater corridor"​. ​
title.txt · Last modified: 2019/10/06 09:07 by floyd