Academic Search Engine Optimization: Improving visibility and accessibility of scientific publications

A text of a scientific paper, adapted for academic search engine optimization (ASEO) tools, enables it to achieve a high ranking in the context of search queries in databases and other search systems. As a result, the article appears in more search queries, receiving more views, downloads, and citations. ASEO not only promotes the fundamental discoverability of the article but also optimizes its metadata. Carefully formulated titles, keywords, and abstracts increase the interest of all categories of potential readers in the paper content, facilitating a deeper understanding of the essence of the described research and the authors’ motivation for conducting it. The purpose of the presented paper is to describe the ASEO tools, enabling the author to optimize the manuscript text for its post-publication promotion. The paper presents basic information about ranking mechanisms, comments on the advantages and limitations of ASEO optimization. It will be useful not only to authors of scientific publications but also to editors of scientific journals who are interested in increasing their visibility.

1. Beel J., Gipp B., Wilde E. Academic Search Engine Optimization (ASEO): Optimizing Scholarly Literature for Google Scholar and Co. Journal of Scholarly Publishing. 2010;41(2):176–190. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.41.2.176

2. Enge E., Spencer S., Stricchiola J. The Art of SEO: Mastering Search Engine Optimization. 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media; 2015. 670 p. Available at: https://archive.org/details/artofseomasterin0000enge/mode/2up (accessed 08.08.2023).

3. Farhadi H., Salehi H., Yunus M. M., Aghaei Chadegani A., Farhadi M., Fooladi M., Ale Ebrahim N. Does it matter which citation tool is used to compare the h-index of a group of highly cited researchers? Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. 2013;7(4):198–202. Available at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.0727.pdf (accessed 11.08.2023).

4. Schilhan L., Kaier C., Lackner K. Increasing visibility and discoverability of scholarly publications with academic search engine optimization. Insights. 2021;34(6):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.534

5. Rovira C., Codina L., Guerrero-Solé F., Lopezosa C. Ranking by relevance and citation counts, a comparative study: Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, WoS and Scopus. Future Internet. 2019;11(9):202. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi11090202

6. Martín-Martín A., Orduña-Malea E., Ayllón J. M., López-Cózar E. D. Does Google Scholar contain all highly cited documents (1950–2013) EC3 Working Papers. 2015;(19):1–96. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1224314.v2

7. Rovira C., Guerrero-Solé F., Codina L. Received citations as a main SEO factor of Google Scholar results ranking. Profesional de la Información. 2018;27(3):559–569. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.may.09

8. Orduña-Malea E., Martín-Martín A., Ayllon J. M., Delgado-Lopez-Cozar E. The silent fading of an academic search engine: The case of Microsoft Academic Search. Online Information Review. 2014;38(7):936–953. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-07-2014-0169

9. Jacques T. S., Sebire N. J. The impact of article titles on citation hits: An analysis of general and specialist medical journals. JRSM Short Reports. 2010;1(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1258/shorts.2009.100020

10. Jamali H. R., Nikzad M. Article title type and its relation with the number of downloads and citations. Scientometrics. 2011;88(2):653–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0412-z

11. Tikhonova E. V., Kosycheva M. A. Research paper title: Best design practices. Storage and Processing of Farm Products. 2022;(3):11–25. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.36107/spfp.2022.374

12. Booth A. Clear and present questions: Formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library Hi Tech. 2006;24(3):355–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830610692127

13. Booth A., Noyes J., Flemming K., et al. Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Global Health. 2019;4:e001107. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

14. Bowman J. H. The Catalog as Barrier to Retrieval–Part 1: Hyphens and Ampersands in Titles. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly. 2000;29(4):39–60. https://doi.org/10.1300/J104v29n04_04

15. Lee D. T. S., Zhou Z., Tse T. H. Metamorphic robustness testing of Google Translate. In: Proceedings – 2020 IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops, ICSEW 2020. New York, United States: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020, pp. 388–395. https://doi.org/10.1145/3387940.3391484

16. Tikhonova E. V., Kosycheva M. A. Effective Keywords: Strategies for their formulation. Health, Food & Biotechnology. 2021;3(4):7–15. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.36107/hfb.2021.i4.s122

17. Chen Y.-N., Ke H.-R. A study on mental models of taggers and experts for article indexing based on analysis of keyword usage. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2014;65(8):1675–1694. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23077

18. Johanson J. Search Engine Optimization and the long tail of Web Search. Uppsala: Uppsala University; 2016. 27 р. Available at: https://cl.lingfil.uu.se/exarb/arch/johanssond2016.pdf (accessed 08.08.2023).

19. Кириллова О. В. Редакционная подготовка научных журналов по международным стандартам: рекомендации эксперта БД Scopus. М.: Нобель пресс; 2013. 90 с. Режим доступа: https://rassep.ru/academy/biblioteka/106592/ (дата обращения: 11.08.2023).