Plural Keywords

[peteark]

Today I've been doing a fair bit of research and blogging on the subject of plural keywords.

Without doubt there's an unusual phenomenon based on the demographics of search engine users.

On Google UK

Building contractor is typed in 480 times

Whilst building contractors 1900

The problem lies with the implementation of plurals into a singular element, bearing in mind natural webpages (ones that puts a visitors needs well before those of search engines) are going to find the use of plurals tricky.

An example

If you owned a Guest House in Bristol you may want to target the term Bristol Guest Houses, the problem is there’s a semantic mis-match.

It’s all to do with the fact we receive multiple results for our queries, it makes us physiologically enter plurals even though we are searching for individual elements

An interesting subject, well I think so anyway, I guess the wife would disagree.

[morestar]

I think it's an interesting subject too! I have to deal with this a lot and I suppose most SEO copywriters do.

There is a way of getting the plural terms in, just like the way I do in my first signature link. I found that term (and one other) were the top searched for key-phrases so I tried my best to manage the plural version into the anchor text as much as I could.

I believe though, that a time will come that you'd rank for both the plural and singular key-phrases once you've truly established yourself as an authority in your field to a decent extent as for instance, If you are one of the best guest houses in Bristol, why shouldn't you rank higher for best guest house in Bristol and visa versa? I'm not saying there's a direct correlation but you can probably make one.

[peteark]

It would be nice to think that websites that have committed to the ethical path will eventually shine throwgh whilst others (the blog commenting brigade) are cast into the wilderness.

We can live in hope hey.

[morestar]

It would be nice to think that websites that have committed to the ethical path will eventually shine throwgh whilst others (the blog commenting brigade) are cast into the wilderness.

We can live in hope hey.

Well I personally don't see anything unethical about using the plural over the singular...what are you referring to?

[peteark]

I was refering to your comment


I believe though, that a time will come that you'd rank for both the plural and singular key-phrases once you've truly established yourself as an authority in your field

[Dreamrage]

I had a look at my webmaster tools and have actually noticed this. It's interesting to see that you can rank for a singular and plural keyword. Strangely enough, the plural sort of appeared out of its own from the content on the site. I did, however, work a few of the plural keywords into my campaign and have since been doing rather well. I don't see anything wrong with it either, and seeing that it just happened out of its own, why not implement it and see how it goes. I am almost always revising keywords from my research and swapping ones that don't perform as well out, and then replacing them with ones that might perform better.

[Sweet Tooth #3]

Interesting thread. This topic had me baffled when I was starting out and trying to figure how to word my page titles.

But I've found that most of the time, I rank about the same for the plural and singular (in Google).

All you need is some anchor text backlinks for both versions.

And if, for example, the page title has the singular version, I'll try to find to find a way to include the keyword's plural form in the first sentence and throughout the article.

Seems to work pretty well.

[jhannawin]

Yes, this one is tricky. The SEs do a fairly good job at overtly correcting our spelling/typing ability e.g. 'Did you mean ...', but they do nothing for overtly helping with semantic matching e.g. 'Did you want ...' . In the 'guest houses' example this could return 'Did you want results showing sites that list guest houses, or results that show specific guest house websites' ... in Bristol :-)

You can see why they don't, and a significant number of users would just not understand (or care about) the difference.

I need a sit down now, my head hurts.

[enni]

I think most people would search using plural,The more effort should be directed toward optimizing the website for the search phrase involving the very plural keywords.

[peteark]

Hi Enni

It's one thing to say people should do this, that or the other but another to accomplish it

Let's go back to an early example

If we own a Guest House in Bristol and want to target the term 'Bristol Guest Houses' how can we do this naturally and effectively?

Of course we can discuss the 'collective' the whole guest house community but it's never going to work well simply because I own and wish to highlight one solitary venture.

[nickoran]

personally I use googles keyword too to see which would be most beneficial and go for that, the hardest part for me is that it can take some manipulating of the on page text to get plurals in sometimes tho

[LD]

it doesent affect your seo . you can use plurals in alt tags and title tgs of your links. Build an strong off page promotion activity by using plurals and see the result.
The question isn't "how/if plural terms affect SEO" - it's more about how to use plural terms to rank well for SEO.

[dharrison]

Interesting question. You are correct it is difficult to make plural sound natural.

This goes way back to pre-internet, when all we had was the Yellow Pages and similar, sectors were displayed in plural: Plumbers, hairdressers, Insurance companies, etc. This trend is still the norm. The average Joe Public searcher will still look for the plural rather than just one. Making this a necessary task as well as a difficult one.

It does make sense to optimise for both. Thinking of ways you could use a plural term would be a comparison (eg one of the few guest houses on the bristol seafront to serve fish, etc)

[Sweet Tooth #3]

I also take this into account when I target terms where also there is an "ing" or "ed" ending. And it seems you can make it work. But sometimes it can give you a headache to think that far ahead on your articles.

But if you're targeting a 2 word phrase, sometimes you have to use it in a different context to make it coherent and still have that exact phrase in your article.

Sometimes a 2 word phrase, as typed in by the searcher, would be in the context of a noun+noun. If you get creative you can include the same phrase in the context of noun+verb. The word "benefits," is an example of a word that can appear as both a noun and a verb. It's also frequently used in many search queries.

Also, many people search 2 word phrases that just don't sound natural together. Sometimes, these 2 words sound right together if they have the word "and" between them. I don't know if this works for producing the exact key phrase, but sometimes I'll use the "&" symbol and hope Google just ignores it and counts it as a sequential keyword phrase. It looks fine if you use it in a page title or subtitle.

And the last thing...You might be targeting a 2 word keyword phrase that could not possibly go together in a coherent manner. If we call the targeted keyphrase "keyword 1 keyword 2," then let's think about this. If you added 2 sentences, and ended the first sentence with "keyword 1," and started the second sentence with "keyword 2," Google would still see the 2 keywords next to each other and give you credit for having the exact keyword phrase in your article. I don't think that the period and the double space would nullify this, but I could be wrong.

Some people might see this as nitpicking, but I think having the exact keyword phrase in your article is a definite advantage. And on page seo is something you only have to do once.

I would be interested in feedback from other members.

[peteark]

And the last thing...You might be targeting a 2 word keyword phrase that could not possibly go together in a coherent manner. If we call the targeted keyphrase "keyword 1 keyword 2," then let's think about this. If you added 2 sentences, and ended the first sentence with "keyword 1," and started the second sentence with "keyword 2," Google would still see the 2 keywords next to each other and give you credit for having the exact keyword phrase in your article. I don't think that the period and the double space would nullify this, but I could be wrong

I have certainly done this myself when I've been unable to get any semantic match, I actually came up with the idea myself, without research, it gave me a headache...lol

[DanielMoore]

Also, many people search 2 word phrases that just don't sound natural together. Sometimes, these 2 words sound right together if they have the word "and" between them. I don't know if this works for producing the exact key phrase, but sometimes I'll use the "&" symbol and hope Google just ignores it and counts it as a sequential keyword phrase. It looks fine if you use it in a page title or subtitle.

Surely they produce the exact keyword phrases because when you are using "and", " a", "for" in between the keyword they are considered as stop words. The stop words are ignored by Google to speed up the search results.

[deepsand]

The stop words are ignored by Google to speed up the search results.
So-called stop words may be ignored by the indexing engine.

However, they are not categorically ignored by the search engine.

[DanielMoore]

So-called stop words may be ignored by the indexing engine.

However, they are not categorically ignored by the search engine.

Would this imply then that they would not make the exact keyword phrase?

[deepsand]

Would this imply then that they would not make the exact keyword phrase?
What do you mean by "make the exact keyword phrase?"

Users define their query string match type. PPC advertisers define the match type of their keyword phrases. SEs define only the default type to be used in the absence of explicit instructions to the contrary.

[Sweet Tooth #3]

Surely they produce the exact keyword phrases because when you are using "and", " a", "for" in between the keyword they are considered as stop words. The stop words are ignored by Google to speed up the search results.

I was talking about the "&" symbol, not the word "and." Not sure if this works though.


SEs define only the default type to be used in the absence of explicit instructions to the contrary.

What other explicit instructions would you use when doing a typical Google search? Most people would just type in blue widgets for their query, if they were looking for blue widgets.

If you have that exact phrase in your content, you generally rank higher for that term.

[deepsand]

If they just type blue widgets, that's a broad match query; an exact match one would be "blue widget".

BTW, in case some haven't noticed, Google is now first processing some exact match searches as broad match ones, and then asking if you want the exact match instead.

[Sweet Tooth #3]

If they just type blue widgets, that's a broad match query; an exact match one would be "blue widget".

BTW, in case some haven't noticed, Google is now first processing some exact match searches as broad match ones, and then asking if you want the exact match instead.

I might be missing something here. I'm talking about somebody just doing a normal Google search. Are you talking about Adwords or something. Almost nobody uses "quotes" when searching a term.

[deepsand]

I might be missing something here. I'm talking about somebody just doing a normal Google search. Are you talking about Adwords or something.
The statements to which you replied are re. search query strings.


Almost nobody uses "quotes" when searching a term.
Then it's a broad match search, not an exact match one.

[hk2011]

I would treat them as two separate keywords. If you're having a discrepancy in SERPs, then I'd focus on the less well ranked keyword.

[Sweet Tooth #3]

I would treat them as two separate keywords.

This is the approach I took at first. It's not necessary and doubles your work. But on a positive note, you do end up with a lot of double listings, which is great.

[diyday]

Almost nobody uses "quotes" when searching a term.

I believe that there are still plenty of instances where people use quotation marks: when seeking a person's specific name, the name of a business, coding language, a manufacturer's product, some attributable saying/quote, etc. As a matter of fact, I was just at the Google Help forum reading some complaints about how the double-quote search doesn't work as well as it should (or used to).

[deepsand]

As a matter of fact, I was just at the Google Help forum reading some complaints about how the double-quote search doesn't work as well as it should (or used to).
As I noted above, Google is now first processing some exact match searches as broad match ones, and then asking if you want the exact match instead.

Further compounding that problem is the fact that Google very recently eliminated the use of the plus sign from advanced search, and replaced it with the double-quotes!

[jhannawin]

As I noted above, Google is now first processing some exact match searches as broad match ones, and then asking if you want the exact match instead.
Yes, Google seem to be patting us on the head and saying 'we know best'. I just noticed that they 'correct' spelling in the search by default. I had cause to search for 'von etall' (meaning from Etall in Germany, don't ask why ;-) ) the result patronisingly returned the results for 'von metall' and offered me another link for what I really searched on. That happens whether I quote it or not.

If I am using advanced search qualifiers, such as quotes, then I want the results first time. If I am being generous then I'd say that Google are starting to dumb down the features that made them the neatest search engine out there. If I am being cynical I'd say they just created a whole new page of adverts to sell!

This type of thing makes the discussion on plurals mute. If Google are messing with what you enter as your search term by default, then we lose the ability to analyse and adapt. How can you 'optimise' for a term if the first results page shown is not that for the term entered?

[deepsand]

I've recently observed Google intermittently:

Toggling Instant Search on; and,
Retrospectively altering my query string as I type. :shock:


Their SE has now become an implementation of "Let us help you find what we want you to see."

[jhannawin]

Their SE has now become an implementation of "Let us help you find what we want you to see."

And the really scary thing is that 98% of users probably won't notice, or worse will think this is a good thing. However, this is the internet, and giants have come and gone in the past, just might take a few years.

[deepsand]

And the really scary thing is that 98% of users probably won't notice, or worse will think this is a good thing.
As is evidenced by the fawning, bowing of heads and scraping of knees seen in threads such as "Why do you [worship] Google."