Research questions fall into one of three categories: descriptive, predictive, or causal. The past decade has seen many calls for the appropriate use of causal language when the underlying research question is causal, yet it remains common for researchers who are asking fundamentally causal questions to avoid causal language, particularly when articulating their research question. A recent random sample of articles from five of the top journals in epidemiology found that 69% appeared to have causal goals but used non-causal language (eg, association, risk factor, linked to, related to) in the research question. Here, we clarify why, if the underlying research question is causal, it is not only preferable to use causal language to articulate the question, but necessary. We also propose clear guidelines for how often misused terms such as causal effect, association, and estimated causal effect should be used in research articles and in reference to which quantities.