I did some analysis on some Google search page factors. I examined things like the length of the title/description of the search result, the number of bold tags in the title/description, the depth of the url(ie google.com would have depth 0 and google.com/adsense would have depth 1), etc... You can see the graphs here and my full analysis here. If anyone is wondering the queries I used were from the AOL search data that they released. It is the first 800 or so from this file.
I'll do a little summary of what factors correlated with better results: The more bold tags in the title the better the ranking The shorter the title/description the better the ranking Not have ... in the title/description correlated with better ranking The smaller the file size of the page the better the ranking The depth of the page and the number of bolds in the description did not show any clear correlation one way or the other.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing it. However i cant see it as conclusive as one factor is compared to a multitude of variables that make up the ranking. You just dont know which variable is causing the rank. Never the less, some interesting trends.
I am a little confused as to what you are saying. Rank is obviously derived from many different factors. These statistics help determine some things which correlate well with rank. While correlation does not necessarily imply causation, it might and it is worth experimenting with further. I am not sure if it is well accepted or not that click through rate on search results affect the results, but these statistics provide a strong argument for that.
DooD I see very little that couldn't be evaluated a zillion other ways. I would also say it's some strange choices in test matter.... You can't figure out what 'competitive terms' are, and U are doing SEO experiments? Back to the drawing board ol chum Have you considered studying search engineering?