Searches related to: - how are they determined?

[Hissingsid]

I have a problem term. That term does better on Google.co.uk than it does on G.com currently #6 on .co.uk and #11 on .com.

On .co.uk there are 8 links to Searches related to: my search term.My site has pages that are at #2 for 2 of those searches related to terms.

Knowing what I know about my market I can't figure out where Google gets the other 6 "Searches related to" items they don't make sense. They are not completely unrelated but there are definitely 6 other terms that are much more closely related that I would sit far more comfortably.

I'm hoping others here can shed some light onto how Google arrives at these related links. Are they commercial, adwords driven things or organic.

Thanks

Sid

[tedster]

My understanding is that the "Related to"" links are based on query revisions - searches that are frequently followed by a revised search. Serving the user who makes an initial search that doesn't give them what they are looking for is very important to Google - whether the search is actually ambiguous in its meaning or simply too general.

Here's a recent thread about a Google patent on query revision [webmasterworld.com]. As you can see in that thread, we're discussing whether the logic used in determining the most frequent query revisions may also be used to calculate the top ranking positions for the initial searches.

[Hissingsid]

Hi Tedster,

In our niche the related terms don't, IMO, help users. They send them off on a tangent.

It is interesting to note though that for some related terms there appears to be a boost for pages that use those terms but others don't seem to work in that way.

Also if everyone optimises their pages for some of those terms as well as the original term then there will be no advantage to users as eventually the top 10 for the original term and the related terms will become very similar.

It makes you wonder why the folks at Google bother making any changes because millions of webmasters will always follow and try to create what they think Google wants.

Cheers

Sid