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
-
Bad Dates in SERPs, YouTube & Rankings (Nov. 10-18)
We've seen a lot of reports, including Q&A questions, of sites showing bad dates in Google SERPs. I've verified this bug in the wild. There are also reports of bad dates being caused by YouTube embeds, with Google taking the video date instead of the page date. I can also confirm this is happening, although I don't know if it accounts for all of the bad dates. Some people are reporting that these bad dates showing up corresponded with ranking drops. Usually, I would treat that as a coincidence (Google could easily launch an update and have a glitch on the same day), but in some of the reported cases, removing YouTube embeds led to ranking recovery soon after. I can't verify this, but I can't disregard it. There seem to be multiple reports of this recovery. I'm in communication with a Google rep, and they are unaware of any direct connection between a bad date and ranking (such as some kind of QDF effect). I've passed along some data, and they are investigating, but there may have been multiple updates in play that are making for noisy data (even for Google). There did seem to be heavy algorithm flux on November 10th and 18th, with some people speculating the latter spike was a reversal of the former. I have no evidence to support this, but MozCast data and chatter do seem to support both spikes. If you've been affected by this problem and the ranking drops are severe, it's worth temporarily removing YouTube embeds (if feasible). Replace them with direct links (or maybe a linked thumbnail) and have Google re-fetch the page. I can't guarantee it will work, but the risks are low. It's easy to restore the embed. Update (11/22) - Gary Illyes is saying on Twitter that the date problems have been fixed. If you see the proper dates cached, but have not seen rankings recover, then these may be unrelated events.
Algorithm Updates | | Dr-Pete2 -
Missing Keywords in Google SERP
We just got this attached image from one of our partners - has anyone seen Google putting 'missing' keywords in SERPs like this before? They said that it was not a plugin or anything and this is a screenshot of their organic search results. google%20screenshot_zpsgmwaf9e2.png
Algorithm Updates | | ReunionMarketing0 -
Looking to condense SERP reults
For several of our keywords we have two listings on page 1 of the SERP's, both pages on the same domain. It's the "top"
Algorithm Updates | | absoauto
level category and than sub category within that top level category. Ideally, we could condense and have just the one result, at a higher position in the SERP. I thought Google would eventually do this for us as I've seen in the past, but it's been a few years now and still hasn't happened. Any suggestions?0 -
Super Awesome SERPs
Okay, anyone else notice the resent UI launch in the Google SERPs? I was planning a trip to visit a friend in Dayton, Ohio and used the query "things to do in dayton oh" and i got a really neat points of interest bar and city stats. Anyone notice anything else neat with the UI change? Seems like some good stuff for local possibly. example-serp.png
Algorithm Updates | | kchandler0 -
Rich Snippets stopped showing up in SERPS
Up until a few weeks ago my testimonial review ratings (5 star rating system) were showing up in search results but they no longer do. Went to the google rich snippet testing tool and they still do there just not on the real search results. Any thoughts on why? Perhaps an algorithm change?
Algorithm Updates | | casper4340 -
How to get bullet snippets SERPs
http://insidesearch.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-snippets-for-list-pages.html I read this post and have been seeing a lot of results with this feature, but can't figure out exactly why some results get them and others dont. of the results I've seen, many have information in lists or tables (as the article suggests), but some simply have their information listed in separate divs. Does anyone have any further insight on this? The above article is the only one I can find on the subject.
Algorithm Updates | | Hakkasan0 -
Can anyone explain these changes to our Titles in the SERPS?
Hi there, We've been doing well in the SERPS over the past few weeks. Our previous meta title was displayed as: "Hunter Original Tall - Buy Original Tall Online Here" However, recently we've seen the title in the SERP switch over to: "Hunter Original Tall - Cloggs.co.uk" This has occurred on several of our product pages which display a particular style of a certain brand. So for example: "Ugg Bailey Button - Cloggs.co.uk" Has anyone else experienced these changes or can explain why this may have happened?
Algorithm Updates | | NigelJ
There is not change to the source code and our Titles have proven to have good click through rates in the past. Any ideas mozzers?0 -
Are you getting any action from Google +1 ?
If you have added google plus one to your website you can check on the impact by visiting your webmaster tools account. In your GWT account you will see a left menu item for "+1 Metrics". If you click on "Search Impact" you can see the CTR change attributed to +1. Anybody seeing anything there yet?
Algorithm Updates | | EGOL0