16 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
16 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

How does google decide what appears in the answer box?

by Dave Earley
15 replies
  • SEO
    • |
I don't know what it's like for you guys, but google does not always provide an accurate answer in the box on page one during my searches. Furthermore, I've attempted to provide accurate answers with articles, as I'm sure others have as well, but they don't tend to make the cut.

I did have one article chosen and displayed under the first question for a specific place during the course of a few weeks. However, it was recently removed and replaced with a Trip Advisor review which does not adequately answer the question. In fact, half the Trip Advisor reviews in the answer boxes (I have seen) do not correctly answer the questions people ask.

I suspect it's typically based on popularity or domain authority. Which is unfortunate because google does not know how to answer a question and simply relies on popularity. I've tried adjusting titles, headings and adding specific pieces of content, but haven't seen any success for other topics.

If I answer a question with an entire article, why does google display topics which do not adequately answer the question ahead of a personal experience?

I understand it is probably not the best thing to have your site show up in the answer box because most people probably get their answer without looking at the site itself. That's another discussion. I prefer actual details myself and that is the type of information I share.

In the year 2020, why can't google display more accurate answers in its answer box? Requiring website owners to get more back links and popularity is not acceptable. Do they need more time to sift through the information?? I don't get it.
#answer #appears #box #decide #google
Avatar of Unregistered
  • Profile picture of the author DABK
    If I put my Cynical hat on, I say:
    Google exists to make money.
    It makes money when people click on ads.
    People click on ads when they do not find their answer in the organic part of Google. They do that more if it does not look like Google is manipulating them into doing it.

    So Google has to make it look like it's trying damn hard to give them the best answers while making sure it is not.

    How do you like my Cynical hat?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11599155].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dave Earley
      Originally Posted by DABK View Post

      If I put my Cynical hat on, I say:
      Google exists to make money.
      It makes money when people click on ads.
      People click on ads when they do not find their answer in the organic part of Google. They do that more if it does not look like Google is manipulating them into doing it.

      So Google has to make it look like it's trying damn hard to give them the best answers while making sure it is not.

      How do you like my Cynical hat?
      While your hat may have no proof to support its weight, I cannot deny it may exist.

      Of course, I don't use ads so according to your hat my posts may never show up on the first page. I think it more likely has something to do with popularity, which is sad. Perhaps google tests out answers in the box to see how they do (based on clicks?) because obviously google doesn't know the answer.

      I noticed people ask if their are mountains in my city and state. I answered this in a post because no one had, and google thought the best answer was an actual mountain in another state, which makes no sense ( except for the fact the name of that mountain is a city name) at all. While my post easily made it to page one due to lack of competition, it does not make the answer box. Hmmm, confusing. Google still thinks a mountain in another state is a better answer even though there are no mountains near me. Even more confusing, the top post is a list of parks near me (where there are no mountains) but they did use the phrase "mountain biking" in their article.

      I find it difficult to believe google cannot be programmed to be more accurate. I notice the meta description is used a lot to pull info. Sometimes headers are used, and once in awhile a small part of the body is pulled. However, other times it does not pull body content when it is more relevant than posts which are ranked higher.

      I guess I enjoy trying to figure out the impossible...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11599207].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DABK
        Your answer makes me think that my Cynical hat deserves a different name: Realist Hat.


        You'd think with all those billions in their back pocket they'd be able to tell states apart, right?



        Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

        While your hat may have no proof to support its weight, I cannot deny it may exist.

        Of course, I don't use ads so according to your hat my posts may never show up on the first page. I think it more likely has something to do with popularity, which is sad. Perhaps google tests out answers in the box to see how they do (based on clicks?) because obviously google doesn't know the answer.

        I noticed people ask if their are mountains in my city and state. I answered this in a post because no one had, and google thought the best answer was an actual mountain in another state, which makes no sense ( except for the fact the name of that mountain is a city name) at all. While my post easily made it to page one due to lack of competition, it does not make the answer box. Hmmm, confusing. Google still thinks a mountain in another state is a better answer even though there are no mountains near me. Even more confusing, the top post is a list of parks near me (where there are no mountains) but they did use the phrase "mountain biking" in their article.

        I find it difficult to believe google cannot be programmed to be more accurate. I notice the meta description is used a lot to pull info. Sometimes headers are used, and once in awhile a small part of the body is pulled. However, other times it does not pull body content when it is more relevant than posts which are ranked higher.

        I guess I enjoy trying to figure out the impossible...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11599258].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Earley
          Originally Posted by DABK View Post

          Your answer makes me think that my Cynical hat deserves a different name: Realist Hat.


          You'd think with all those billions in their back pocket they'd be able to tell states apart, right?
          Yes, I definitely would, but they are mixing posts about a large city with a mountain which takes that cities name, yet is over 500 miles away. Moreover, it's not as if people are simply typing in the name of the mountain, they are asking if ANY mountains exist in a city. Furthermore, if I write "there are zero mountains but thousands of hills" in an H2 header, I would expect that info to be pulled as an answer to the question. Perhaps they need more time? Maybe someone has to click on my post first? Maybe they don't want my site to be in more than one answer box, I have no idea.

          In any event, my other post was placed back in the answer box over the Trip Advisor one which doesn't quite answer the question being asked. To my knowledge I did not do anything. I didn't make any changes or gain any backlinks. Trip Advisor DA is way over mine and they have a lot more social interaction. The adjustments may be strictly coming from the serps - possibly by people clicking back to get further information?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11599536].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dave Earley
    It took about four weeks, but google has finally updated the answer box and placed my article in the spotlight for variations of the mountain question. It seems some time may be required for google to "figure out" which post has the best answer. Perhaps a certain time period may be required before any article can gain that position?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11601643].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
    Dave, stop thing like a human and start thinking like a bot. Understand that bots are always evolving because that is what they are coded to do, so it may take more time for a bot to derive answers in line with a human's thoughts and questions.


    Think code. Also, your title tags, etc. have little to no impact with Google like it did yesterday. Its not that Google reads your pages like a human and Google never did for that fact.


    Want to make a difference with your website? Think like a bot brother. In this case the bots did the right thing. So stop all the nonsensical complaining and make a difference..


    Think like a bot.
    Signature
    In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11601662].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author expmrb
      Originally Posted by Jeffery View Post

      Dave, stop thing like a human and start thinking like a bot. Understand that bots are always evolving because that is what they are coded to do, so it may take more time for a bot to derive answers in line with a human's thoughts and questions.


      Think code. Also, your title tags, etc. have little to no impact with Google like it did yesterday. Its not that Google reads your pages like a human and Google never did for that fact.


      Want to make a difference with your website? Think like a bot brother. In this case the bots did the right thing. So stop all the nonsensical complaining and make a difference..


      Think like a bot.

      OP is not entirely incorrect. Google SERP's are very faulty and doesn't provide what's asked for. And after this Google May Core update the search results are just garbage and rubbish. They are filled with useless social media links and all. Many good pages are replaced by worthless pinterest posts.
      Signature
      SEO Motionz Forum & Blog- Digital Marketing Forum & Blog,
      Forum Management & Promotion, SEO Tips, Money Making tips etc.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11601848].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
        Originally Posted by expmrb View Post

        OP is not entirely incorrect. Google SERP's are very faulty and doesn't provide what's asked for. And after this Google May Core update the search results are just garbage and rubbish. They are filled with useless social media links and all. Many good pages are replaced by worthless pinterest posts.
        Yes and that just means that the website pages (not websites) that experienced a downturn in the SERPs did not properly perform on-page SEO in the first place. Example: Website Page A ranked in the top 10 for a year or more and a Pinterest Post less than a year old outranks it in the SERPs. Why?

        Is it that Website Page A has not been updated in a year or more whereas Pinterest Post is more up to date? No, Google bots do not work that way.

        As you know, the short story is the Google Bots are focused on the search query aka User Intent (UI). Older, albeit better articles, are typically not optimized for UI 2020 whereas the majority of Pinterest Posts are optimized for UI 2020.
        Signature
        In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11601979].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dave Earley
    Jeffery, how do I know what the bot does, or does not like about my webpage??

    I was going to add, I thought user intent was a major factor these days. However, when I add maps, directions, menus, trail maps (via hyperlink to those from appropriate text in the content) no rankings have increased in the short term. In fact, several larger articles drop in rankings IF the "nofollow" tags are removed.

    All of those links should improve user-friendliness of the content by allowing them to reach a place, see a map, or a menu. So far I have found it does not. Meanwhile other "popular" articles which are older take precedence and do not seem to have that user intent.

    How can I better determine what is the appropriate user-intent for a specific topic?

    Changing titles, headers and images to better reflect the topic (and then re-indexing) seems to help slightly. This is why I mentioned it previously. However, adding links to other places I believe people will want to go seems to hurt a bit, or make no difference.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11601995].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
      Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

      Jeffery, how do I know what the bot does, or does not like about my webpage??
      It's not about 'what the bots like' it is more about 'what pages on your site the bots return to the search query'. Do you have a tracking pixel that reveals if your visitors are coming from a search on Google, Twitter, or Facebook?


      Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

      I was going to add, I thought user intent was a major factor these days. However, when I add maps, directions, menus, trail maps (via hyperlink to those from appropriate text in the content) no rankings have increased in the short term. In fact, several larger articles drop in rankings IF the "nofollow" tags are removed.
      There is a major Google update that started in May, so be patient and let it do it's work, so come end of June if you don't see the results you expected then find out the.. why.

      Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

      All of those links should improve user-friendliness of the content by allowing them to reach a place, see a map, or a menu. So far I have found it does not. Meanwhile other "popular" articles which are older take precedence and do not seem to have that user intent.
      User friendliness and User Intent are two different animals. Just because a site is User Friendly (a good thing in terms of overall website SEO) that doesn't mean your page(s) solve the search query.

      Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

      How can I better determine what is the appropriate user-intent for a specific topic?
      Again, Tracking Pixel.

      Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

      Changing titles, headers and images to better reflect the topic (and then re-indexing) seems to help slightly. This is why I mentioned it previously. However, adding links to other places I believe people will want to go seems to hurt a bit, or make no difference.
      Savidge4 explained that to you in a different thread when discussing the Silo. The take-away is "adding links to other places" transfers a little link juice to "other places" and I assume you mean off-site links. Do your off-site links use the same anchor text? If they do then you are doing it right. Just make sure the links are not broken and more importantly the links go out to Google Friendly sites/pages.

      Are you using the Silo strategy or not?
      Signature
      In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11602014].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Earley
        Originally Posted by Jeffery View Post


        Are you using the Silo strategy or not?
        Physically, yes. Virtually, no. I did spend a good deal of time separating my marbles, but also threw a few dice into the jar. I did not adjust any current url structures because doing so will break all of the links I currently have.

        For a long time certain content was chosen by title to rank for many variations of a key phrase. Very recently I noticed a small bump in certain rankings, as well as more articles ranking for their key phrases even though they are related to other articles.

        Last year I made a huge mistake of using similar words in multiple articles. It took some time to learn these articles were competing with each other, even though they were discussing different aspects of activities. Eventually, I went through and changed specific words to rank for other variations. This helped some articles instantly, while others needed more "time".

        Certain topics rank very well while others are just in the mix. Although the latter tend to have much more competition. There are still marbles to sort here and there. Furthermore, new colors will continue to be added. I have hundreds of articles and did not consider this, or any strategy, when getting online.

        I have been using search console and the analytics plugin only. So yes, I can see where people come from, but that doesn't exactly tell me if they found what they were looking for.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11602037].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mandiradebnath
    Though Google AdWords are trending, still I prefer organic SEO for lead generation. I try to convince my clients to take the SEO service only.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11602143].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
    Originally Posted by Jeffery View Post

    Are you using the Silo strategy or not?
    Originally Posted by Dave Earley View Post

    Physically, yes. Virtually, no. I did spend a good deal of time separating my marbles, but also threw a few dice into the jar. I did not adjust any current url structures because doing so will break all of the links I currently have.

    Dave, what do you mean by "Physically, yes. Virtually, no."?


    Aside from maintaining all of your related content in the same Silo(s), the URL structure and the navigation structure are the most important aspects of a Silo.


    I can't remember the domain, so I can't take a look.
    Signature
    In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11602166].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dave Earley
      Originally Posted by Jeffery View Post

      Dave, what do you mean by "Physically, yes. Virtually, no."?


      Aside from maintaining all of your related content in the same Silo(s), the URL structure and the navigation structure are the most important aspects of a Silo.


      I can't remember the domain, so I can't take a look.
      The way I read an explanation - physical refers to specific categories which organize the theme, and can be found using menus. Virtual uses a category landing page which is supported by links from related content only.

      So, I did improve the categorical structure, although it will continue to be broken down as more content is added. Furthermore, the url(s) do not show the categories because I use "domain/title" and have some backlinks pointing to most articles. Is it really worth adding the category to the url if it will cause a loss in backlinks and create broken url(s)?

      My domain is places for pups. I've moved many things around since you last saw it. It's still a work in progress and I'm STILL learning why some things rank very well while other things are lost in the mix!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11602187].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author @Jennifer
    google serve only web pages who have maximum relevancy with the search query and explain better the saercgh intent. because google want that their user gets best results and relevant solution to build trust.
    so that if you want that your web page should appereaed in serp than you should make relevant you page nad try to fulfill all desire answer who created to your keyword and you can use outbound link to explain better.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11611554].message }}
Avatar of Unregistered

Trending Topics