How does NIH get these logos in the SERPs
-
When I search google.com for "OCD" or "bipolar" or other medical problems the #1 organic position is held by the NIH.gov website and a logo accompanies their listing. (see below)
I see the logo in Chrome, IE and Firefox.
Are you seeing that too?
I see this logo with lots of NIH.gov listings in the SERPs. Any idea if that is something that webmasters can trigger or is that something google is controlling?
-
You are most welcome.
-
Thank you Yousaf, great information.
-
I have often thought along these lines, having a encyclipiedia and dictionary in the results for many terms is more impoartant than relying on the algo. in fact I thiink rand did a article stateing things like "results need freshness", stateingg that the results will include a new result as well as a research result and other sort of results aswell of what the algo brings up.
A query for a type of car, may mean you want to buy, hire, fix, see race video, find images or learn about. results should try to get all these types of results even if they do not deserver high rank by algo alone. -
Thanks for that URL! I didn't realise there were so many.
-
This has been around for a while now, its called Google Onebox result. OneBox results are shown for queries that can be answered instantly or when a direct link can be offered.
You can see the feature here http://www.google.com/help/features.html
-
-
Maybe half... but I saw a lot of bipolar rubbish with ads today. Check this out... http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=bipolar+adsense
-
Panda took care of half of that rubbish didn't it?
-
Nice diagnosis. Thanks Dejan!
-
That's right. This is no ordinary result and is an extra much like news at the bottom.
-
It's a hell of a joining-of-dots, and I hate to utter anything along the lines of "two indexes" or "supplemental index" etc. But the NIH listings behave differently in the SERPs, and I can see how there's greater inherent value in a set of search results that returns verified authority links for medical queries than a set of search results that doesn't.
-
Counting results on the page... yes this is a separate result completely.
Unless Google introduced 11 results per page and I was not aware of it
-
Interesting... so, you think google might be giving NIH outside priority in the SERPs for these queries?
-
Might it be significant that the NIH results don't have the +1 button, nor Instant Preview, when they're in the SERPs?
I'm joining some pretty distant dots here, but that might suggest that they're part of a separate search index? I can certainly see how providing one authoritative link for a very precise medical query would enhance search quality.
-
Thank you, Dejan. I hope that Google is getting smarter at recognizing absolute authority.
I think that for matters of Health, it is very very important for Google to return good results. Lots of people use information on websites to make very important health decisions.
Imagine what happens when a person finds crap about an important health issue but does not realize that they are on Bipolar-Make-Munny-Wit-Adsense.com
-
It's either part of Google getting smarter and detecting absolute authoritative results for a search vertical or... Google starting to steer away from their algorithm only and no-humans policy in results and marking certain things by hand.
I did a quick search for that image in Tin Eye (nothing) and in Google (1 result) so it seems like this is Google's thing only and the image is designed to highlight a verified health result.
This reminds me of comment that Mr. Weitz from Bing said about the future of search and how ridiculous it might be to judge the validity of results by link popularity in some cases:
"An expert from Bing, Stefan Weitz, notes that relevancy in search is based on PageRank. PageRank determines the position of a web page based on the analysis of links referring to that page. He notes that relying solely on this model to find, for instance, the best cancer hospital is ridiculous."
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Have you ever changed the logo anchor text from "logo" to "keyword"? How Google considers?
Hi all, We know that generally logo with the website homepage link is the first link crawled by Google and other search engines. Can we change the anchor text from "logo" to "keyword"? Have any one tried or seen others doing? How Google considers it? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
Meta robots at every page rather than using robots.txt for blocking crawlers? How they'll get indexed if we block crawlers?
Hi all, The suggestion to use meta robots tag rather than robots.txt file is to make sure the pages do not get indexed if their hyperlinks are available anywhere on the internet. I don't understand how the pages will be indexed if the entire site is blocked? Even though there are page links are available, will Google really index those pages? One of our site got blocked from robots file but internal links are available on internet for years which are not been indexed. So technically robots.txt file is quite enough right? Please clarify and guide me if I'm wrong. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Clean up of Links, What to get rid of?
We have been cleaning up our back office and preparing our .com domain to take all our future traffic and have got into a debate about how far to clean up the old past links. We have not ever had a penalty on the site as far as we know, but did once get the site taken offline by Google as they thought it was a malware site back in March this year. They put it straight back up and running in 5 hours, but was very strange as it is an amazon-webstore retail site. We are not sure why Google thought (edit: typo) this, so just in-case we have been combing through the historical links and now started to disavow any links we cannot get removed manually. So far just a couple of sites that have no relevance to our retail business. However, the debate we have been having is around Directory listings: Should we get rid of these too? Gut reaction is Yes, based on the need for quality relevant links for the end user, but then some are passing proper links to relevant sections of our site albeit in a directory format. Dmoz comes to mind Any thoughts? Bruce.
Algorithm Updates | | BruceA0 -
Has anyone used Capterra and will I get penalized for paid links?
Hello - I'm contemplating buying a directory listing on the software promotion website http://www.capterra.com/ . It's a site that gets quite a bit of traffic for people searching for software products and I was interested in promoting my software product there, but I don't want to ruin our very good standing with Google at this time if Google deems Capterra as selling paid links. I'm not interested in this for links but instead as a good source of referral traffic for my software site. If anyone has used Capterra or has advice on whether Capterra might injure my SERP rankings, I would appreciate it. Thanks, Jeff
Algorithm Updates | | DenverDude0070 -
SERP Drop
Hi, I have been trading online since 2006 and over the years I have built up some impressive SERP's for keywords such as "mens underwear' which I was SERP 1 for. However, over the past 6 months I have pretty much dropped off the face of Google for a large proportion of my keywords. I suspect I have been hit by the Panda/Penguin updates and do not know how to recover this. I have a mixture of what I consider to be relevant and healthy links, but there are also a few links in there that Google would no longer like. However, I believe that the majority of my links are OK. What should I do? Thanks i97zo6W.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | UnderMe0 -
Could EMD (Exact Match Domain) have cause SERP drops?
Hi all, Another suggestion was given for our fall in SERPS. Recently Matt Cutts announced that EMDs would be hit by new algoritms. http://www.seroundtable.com/google-panda-20-15789.html Only our site with exacts matches... cours-telephone-anglais, curso-ingles-telefono, kurse-englisch-telefon, and corso-inglese-telefono were hit. Does anyone else have experience of this? Would a solution be to create new URLS and redirect? Or would a redirect carry the penalty over? Is there anyway to fix that sort of penalty? Many thanks for your help.
Algorithm Updates | | Quime0 -
Does this mean that exact keyword phrase anchor text is not the dominating ranking factor anymore for serps?http://insidesearch.blogspot.com/2011/11/ten-recent-algorithm-changes.html
Does this mean that exact keyword phrase anchor text is not the dominating ranking factor anymore for serps? http://insidesearch.blogspot.com/2011/11/ten-recent-algorithm-changes.html If so what is the new most important factor?
Algorithm Updates | | AndrewSEO0 -
Google changing case of URLs in SERPs?
Noticed some strange behavior over the last week or so regarding our SERPs and I haven't been able to find anything on the web about what might be happening. Over the past two weeks, I've been seeing our URLs slowly change from upper case to lower case in the SERPs. Our URLs are usually /Blue-Fuzzy-Widgets.htm but Google has slowly been switching them to /blue-fuzzy-widgets.htm. There has been no change in our actual rankings nor has it happened to anyone else in the space. We're quite dumbfounded as to why Google would choose to serve the lower case URL. To be clear, we do not build links to these lower case URLs, only the upper. Any ideas what might be happening here?
Algorithm Updates | | Natitude0