What strong and weak headings look like
Strong (cited at 41%):
- "How is cart abandonment rate calculated?" (mirrors "how to calculate cart abandonment rate")
- "What does proactive chat ROI look like in 2026?" (mirrors "proactive chat roi 2026")
- "When does Shopify B2B beat WooCommerce wholesale?" (mirrors "shopify b2b vs woocommerce")
Weak (cited at 29%):
- "The numbers" (extractable, but not shaped like a query)
- "A new approach" (vague, no query)
- "Some thoughts on this" (no query, low information)
How to test a heading
For each H2 and H3: read it aloud, then imagine typing it into Google or asking ChatGPT. If it sounds like something a real person would search, the match is strong. If it sounds stilted or unlikely, rewrite it. Tools like Google's autocomplete, AnswerThePublic, and Also Asked help you check how people actually phrase the question.
Why heading-query match matters
Generative engines use heading text as the signal for the content beneath it. A heading that matches a query gets cited as the answer to that query. A heading that matches no query is effectively invisible, even if the writing under it is excellent.
The mechanism is structural: the engine doesn't read all the prose to find an answer. It finds headings that match queries, then extracts the prose beneath them. The quality of your headings sets the size of your extraction surface.
Related terms
- Extractable claim — the per-sentence companion lever
- Concept density — an adjacent content-quality signal
- Onsite conversion agent — the category Yokaify writes about
See also
- The 2026 SEO/GEO strategy field guide — Standard 2 of the editorial standards
- Citation grounding — the engine-side extraction mechanism
Last updated May 31, 2026. Citation-rate data from the Stanford CRFM 2026 generative-search analysis; content was rephrased for compliance with licensing restrictions.