3006 system 1 accout time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

111
Mad Science Experiments in SEO & Social Media Rand Fishkin, Wizard of Moz [email protected] | @randfish

description

, and user-experience experts 2005 2013 Motivation: Why Study Mobile? REUTERS/Kimimasa Mayama Michael Sohn/AP 83% of US doctors own a smartphone Source: Manhattan Research, Taking the Pulse® U.S. 2013. 62% of US doctors are likely to abandon a mobile website if it’s not optimized for a smartphone Source: Google & Manhattan Research, Screen to Script: The Doctor’s Digital Path to Treatment, June 2012. time spent on smartphone per session Approximately how many minutes do you use your smartphone in a typical session? Among those using a smartphone during or between patient consultations. Source: Manhattan Research, Ta, and user-experience experts 2005 2013 Motivation: Why Study Mobile? REUTERS/Kimimasa Mayama Michael Sohn/AP 83% of US doctors own a smartphone Source: Manhattan Research, Taking the Pulse® U.S. 2013. 62% of US doctors are likely to abandon a mobile website if it’s not optimized for a smartphone Source: Google & Manhattan Research, Screen to Script: The Doctor’s Digital Path to Treatment, June 2012. time spent on smartphone per session Approximately how many minutes do you use your smartphone in a typical session? Among those using a smartphone during or between patient consultations. Source: Manhattan Research, Ta

Transcript of 3006 system 1 accout time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Page 1: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Mad Science Experiments in SEO & Social Media

Rand Fishkin, Wizard of [email protected] | @randfish

Page 2: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Caveat #1I am not a scientist.

Page 3: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Caveat #2Search engines & social platforms change. These results probably will, too.

Page 4: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Caveat #3Don’t misinterpret my enthusiasm for certainty! Skepticism of even those tests that produces consistent, repeatable results is wise.

Page 5: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

with some fun, less rigorous, one-off tests.Let’s Start

Page 6: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Has Google Really “Stuck a Fork” in All Forms of Guest Blogging?

Page 8: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 9: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 10: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 12: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 13: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 14: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:There’s a kind of guest post Google wants to count and a kind they don’t. If you can’t tell the difference, do as Matt says and stick a fork in it

Page 15: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Did Google’s Removal of Author Pics Directly Affect AdWords CTR?

Page 16: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 18: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

“…it’s clear to us that based on this data, it’s not realistic to say the deletion of Google authorship photos has no impact on the CTR of other elements on the SERP.”

- Larry Kim, Wordstream

Page 19: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 20: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Avg CTR change 2wks prior vs 2 wks

after removal

Appearance of authorship in

top 10Keyphrase bid

on by Moz

SEO Tools

SEO

Backlinks

KW Research Tool

Keyword Search

Mozrank

-5%

+19%

+8%

-1%

-13%

+23%

#3, #4, #9, #10

#3, #9

#2, #6, #10

#3, #5, #7, #8, #9

#3, #5, #7, #8

#5, #7, #8, #9

Page 21: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:Larger sample sets are critical to understand whether authorship pics removal positively affected AdWords CTR. I wouldn’t categorize us as having a “smoking gun” at this point.

Page 22: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Do Photo Tweetstorms Cost Followers or Grow Them?

Page 23: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 24: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

The most followers I’ve ever lost in a day

Page 25: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 26: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 27: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 28: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

How does that compare to an average Sunday?

Page 29: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:Photo tweetstorms are probably too interruptive (even when “on topic”) to be a valuable tool for me on a regular basis.

Page 30: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Can Internal Links Move the Needle By Themselves?

Page 31: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Ugh. Page Three? I can do better than that.

Page 32: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

I went to ~15 of the most relevant pages on Moz, and added a link to the post from inside the

content (not footers/sidebars/nav).

Page 33: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

3 weeks after these pages were re-indexed with the new link, the

page dropped 2 ranking positions

Page 34: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Bill Sebald ran a very similar test1 and found similar results (inconsistent, minor movement)

Page 35: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:I’m in the process of repeating this test a few more times, but I suspect internal anchor text and links are still playing a relatively minor role (especially when it’s older pages being updated)

Page 36: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Can Anchor Text InfluenceSearch Suggest?

Page 37: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

A few years back, I started using this anchor text to link to Geraldine’s blog in my official bio (which goes on a lot

of event sites when I speak)

Page 38: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Hmm… That’s interesting.

Page 39: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Not a personalized thing.

Page 40: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Other non-anchor phrases in the bio don’t appear to be impacting suggest

Page 41: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Research paper SERPs may be another good

example of this

Page 42: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Only 18 results for this phrase, but all are

linking with the exact anchor text to this PDF

document

Page 43: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:More testing is needed, but it seems likely that anchor text influences search suggest more so than other kinds of in-document, text-based phrase use.

Page 44: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

More rigorous, controlled, repeatable experimentsPhase 2

Page 45: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Does Google Index URLs Shared on Social Media Faster?

Page 46: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Using nonsense words with few results, I created a variety of test pages w/ no links to them.

Page 47: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Some I tweeted (not all from my account)

Page 48: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Others were shared on Google+

Page 49: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Shared on Google+

Shared on Twitter In XML Sitemap Only

~12 hours

~10 hours

~11 hours

~12 hours

~11 hours

~3 days

3-4 days

*each test was performed on a unique URL and keyword combination with no overlap and no conflating factors I could find (e.g. links, non-network sharing, etc)

Page 50: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:The effect may be related to scrapers or something else (and not directly tied to social networks), but regardless, social sharing looks to be a consistently faster indexing method.

Page 51: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Can Google+ Shares or +1s Impact Non-Personalized Search?

Page 52: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 53: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25

#26

At 10:50am, the test URL ranked #26 in logged-out, non-

personalized, non-geo-biased, Google US results.

Page 54: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

42 minutes later, after ~30 shares, 40 +1s, and several other G+ accounts posting

the link, the target moved up to position #23

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25

#26

Page 55: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25

#26

48 hours later, after 100 shares of the post, 95 +1s, and tons of additional posts, the result was

back down to #25

Page 56: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25

#26

It bounced around a little, settled in at #22, then recently fell again

to #29

Page 57: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Many G+ users personalized results, however, were clearly

affected.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

Page 58: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Eric Enge and the Stone Temple crew ran a much more in-depth analysis2 with consistent, similar results.

Page 59: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:Activity on Google+ does not appear to directly influence non-personalized rankings. But for personalized/logged-in rankings, they can still be powerful.

Page 60: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Has Anchor Text Lost Its Once Mighty Impact on Rankings?

Page 61: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

1) Three word, informational keyword phrase with relatively light competition and stable rankings

Test Conditions:

2) We selected two results (“A” and “B”), ranking #13 (“A”) and #20 ( “B”) in logged-out, non-personalized results

3) We pointed links from 20 pages on 20 unique, high-DA, high-trust, off-topic sites at both “A” and “B”

Page 62: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

A) We pointed 20 links from 20 domains at this result with anchor text exactly matching the query

phrase

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

B) We pointed 20 links from the same 20 pages as “A” to this URL

with anchor text that did not contain any words in the query

Page 63: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

After 20 days, all of the links had been indexed by Google. “A” and “B” both moved up 4 positions. None of the other results moved more than 2

positions.

Page 64: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Repeat the Experiment!

Page 65: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

B) We pointed 20 links from 20 domains to this URL with anchor

text that did not contain any words in the query

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

A) We pointed 20 links from the same pages/domains at this result with anchor text exactly matching

the query phrase

Page 66: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

1) Three word, informational keyword phrase with relatively light competition and stable rankings

Anchor Text Test #2

2) We selected two results (“A” and “B”), ranking #20 (“A”) and #14 ( “B”) in logged-out, non-personalized results

3) We pointed links from 20 pages on 20 unique, high-DA, high-trust, off-topic sites at both “A” and “B”

Page 67: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

After 16 days, all of the links had been indexed by Google. “A” moved up 19 positions to #1! B moved up 5 positions to #9. None of the other results moved more than 2 positions.

Page 68: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Repeat the Experiment!

Page 69: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

1) Three word, hobby-related keyword phrase with very light competition and stable rankings

Anchor Text Test #3

2) We selected two results (“A” and “B”), ranking #31 (“A”) and #11 ( “B”) in logged-out, non-personalized results

3) We pointed links from the same 20 pages on 20 unique, high-DA, high-trust, off-topic sites at both “A” and “B”

Page 70: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

B) Non-anchor links pointed here

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#31

#32

#33

#34

#35

#36

#37

#38

#39

#40

A) Anchor text links pointed here

Page 71: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

After 8 days, not quite all of the links had been indexed by

Google. “A” moved up 30 positions to #1! B moved up 1 position to #10. None of the other results moved more

than 2 positions.

Page 72: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:Links with exact match anchor text are still considerably more powerful than non-anchor match links (and surprisingly powerful overall).

Page 73: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Do Nofollowed Links Have Any Direct Impact on Rankings?

Page 74: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

1) Low search volume queries with very stable results (first test was on a competitive result, second was on a very low difficulty query)

Nofollow Link Tests

2) All links were nofollowed (confirmed by asking IMEC participants to submit their URLs in web form)

3) Links were placed in page content, never comments, footers, headers, nav, or sidebars

Page 75: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Test #1: We pointed nofollow links from pages on 55 unique domains at

the page ranking #16

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

Page 76: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Test #1: After indexation of all the links, the page only moved

up a single result.

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

Page 77: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

Test #1: We asked participants to remove the nofollows, and the page moved up rapidly to

#6

Page 78: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Repeat the Experiment!

Page 79: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

Test #2: We pointed nofollow links from pages on 42 unique domains at

the page ranking #9

Page 80: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

Test #2: After indexing all the nofollow links, the page rose to position #6 and

stayed there.

Page 81: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

Test #2: We asked participants to remove the nofollows. Upon indexation,

the page rose to position #5 where it remains (75% of links re-indexed 8 days

later)

Page 82: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:The experiment needs to be repeated 2-3 more times at least, but early data suggests there may be a relationship between ranking increases and in-content, nofollowed links

Page 83: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

A Fascinating Side-Effect Presented Itself in All of Our

Link-Based Experiments

Page 84: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

Months after the links had been removed, every page we

linked to continued to rank considerably higher than their

initial position

Page 85: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

This phenomenon has consistently held true for our more recent link tests,

though those links have only been down weeks rather than months.

Page 86: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Respect to Martin Panayotov and Mike King. They called it 3 years ago

in the Moz blog comments.

Page 87: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:Link ghosts appear to be a real phenomenon with powerful and lasting effects. Studying this more could lead to some fascinating insights & tactics.

Page 88: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Can Query & Click Volume Directly Impact Rankings?

Page 89: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

At the time I sent this tweet, the page had been live and indexed for just under 9 days

Page 90: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

3hrs + 228 clicks later

Page 91: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 92: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Repeat the Experiment!

Page 93: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

1) 4 of the 6 were totally private, known only to the IMEC testing group. 2 were publicly promoted on social.

6 Unique Query & Click Tests

2) Queries with very little to no search volume were chosen. Clicks confirmed through a web form & analytics.

3) We strived to make the queries and clicks happen in as short a period as possible, but this was quite hard w/ the private tests (public tests were done in 3-6 hour windows)

Page 94: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Private test:164 clicks

Private test:143 clicks

Private test: 148 clicks

+1 position +1 position +1 positionEach test was performed on relatively non-competitive SERPs with low search volume, old pages ranking, and nearly no movement or new results or new incoming links to ranking pages.

Public test:581 clicks

Public test:434 clicks

Disamb test: 148 clicks

+1 position +1 position -1 position

Page 95: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

I worried that by publishing a blog post on the experiment, we nudged Google to tighten their criteria

around how clicks influence rankings(but it’s impossible to test that hypothesis)

From my blog post on Queries & Clicks

Page 96: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Just try it one more

time…

Page 97: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

8 days after its publication, this blog post ranked #10 for this query

Page 98: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 99: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

315 clicks and ~2 hours later…

It’s ranking #5!

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

Page 100: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

After another 30 minutes (3 hours total) and 60 clicks (~375

total), it’s moved to #1

Page 101: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim
Page 102: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

My Takeaway:Queries and clicks can, at least in some circumstances, have an effect on rankings. Determining what triggers this effect is our next step.

Page 103: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

ExperimentsFuture

Page 104: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Does text surrounding a link influence the ranking of the linked-to page?

Could these words near this link make that page rank better for queries that include

(or are related) to them?

Page 105: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

How many searches does it take to impact search suggest?

Page 106: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Do On-Topic Links Pass More Value than Off-Topic Links?

Page 107: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Will multiple links from a high authority site move rankings more than one link each from

multiple, low authority sites?

Page 108: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Can we get wider reach for Facebook posts with a little upfront engagement?

Page 109: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

the Quest!Join

Page 110: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Contribute to IMEC Lab experiments by signing up at:

bit.ly/imeclab

Page 111: 3006 system 1 accout  time spent on smartphone per session Approxim

Download:

bit.ly/mozmadscience