Logging out of Google vs. &PWS=0 ?
-
I typically append &pws=0 to my Google queries when I'm gathering results to share with a client.
I recently sat in on another digital marketing firms presentation to the client, and they made a big deal about how their search engineers had conducted all the searched by "painstaking logging out of google, using a fresh browser, etc..." In my mind I was thinking that it was either a search engineer wasting time, or some hyperbole to impress the client.
But I didn't really know for sure. Is &pws=0 actually equivellent to using a completely annonymous browser. For fun, I ran some queries under incognito on chrome running off a thumbdrive, and compared them to &PWS=0 results from my everday browswer while logged into google.
I couldn't see any difference, but in my quick informal test, I also didn't find any difference between a personal SERP and a &PWS=0 SERP, so maybe I just didn't try the right query.
Any thoughts?
-
Yep, I agree with you there - never have trusted using &pws=0 logged in or out
-
To be honest adding &pws=0 is not as strong as it once was a few years ago, in todays market if you want one of the best ways to view non personalized results you need to use the Google Ad Preview Tool -
https://adwords.google.com/d/AdPreview/?__u=1000000000&__c=1000000000
Their is no way logging out will totally wipe all the data.
-
Pretty sure that &pws=0 doesn't work for google instant, but does when instant is disabled. So logged out/clearing cookies etc seems like the most accurate when Instant is on.
I usually to run a seperate firefox browser (everything else in Chrome/Safari) with 'never remember history' assigned, instant assigned off, not logged in and running a cool little plug-in that automatically adds the &pws=0 to google searches (find it here fire IE and FF). I find this to be pretty suitable for 'un-personalised' results and not much hassle.
Cyrus wrote an article about this a little while ago that you might find useful. But i agree, the logging out every time and clearing all your history seems like overkill.
-
I've no direct research either way, but when I met Eric Enge (of Stone Temple Consulting) he told me to be logged in and use &pws=0. I'd very much trust his opinion
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Does &pws=0 still work?
Hi All I have have been kind of out of the seo scene for a while, does &pws=0 still work? I only ask as the search console says our brand name has droped to an average postion 3 ( instead of 1), but every time I check I we are 1st ( and I can see anything behind it that could possiabley get in front of it. Thanks Edit: Actually I also tried testing incognito, via a proxy and &pws=0, we are always 1st
Keyword Research | | PaddyDisplays0 -
Paid vs Organic Keyword Optimisation
Hi Im wondering whether I should optimise my site with Organic search terms that drive traffic to the site or the paid terms i use in Google search ads?
Keyword Research | | aplnzmarch180 -
So Google encrypts keywords... so what! just look in webmaster tools...
Buongiorno from 11 degrees C very cloudy & dull wetherby UK 🙂 With Google encypting all organic search terms and (Not Provided) appearing like an unwanted rash of eczema doesnt the panic end when you just get that data from Webmaster tools? Maybe ive got it wrong but isnt all the organic keyword data sitting in webmaster tools any way? so in the words of Lance-Corporal Jack Jones - Dont Panic! Any insights welcome 🙂
Keyword Research | | Nightwing0 -
Organic search by Simply Hired in Google Analytics
Hello there, In Google Analytics I found that there are many visits from Simplyhired - SimplyHired / organic . I don't know is there a way to see where exactly they come from Simplyhired, by what kind of a search. When I click on the link "SimplyHired / organic" in Sources> All traffic it doesn't show any details about keywords or urls in that website http://www.simplyhired.com/
Keyword Research | | HrishikeshKarov0 -
Small Doubt about Google Keyword Tool Search Data
No. of searches for some query in Google Keyword Tool for a specific country shows data for last 12 months or for last 1 month? Please reply. 6hHTw.png
Keyword Research | | ksbnok0 -
How reliable is GWT's keyword data & what is the most accurate way of determining keywords you currently rank for?
I have been monitoring the query data (keywords, average position, CTR, etc.) in GWT, but sometimes the ranking data seems off. I filter the dates for the past week, so it is the most recent. I manually check some of the rankings and they are way off. Does anyone have feedback on this? If you have access to multiple domain data, that would be great. What is the most accurate way of determining keywords you currently rank for? I have also used keywordspy, and that is off too!
Keyword Research | | inhouseseo0 -
Why does google's autocomplete not align with google's keyword tool?
Is google autocomplete based solely off keyword search volume? Or is there some other factors i am missing here? Here's an example: Auto complete suggestions for 'storage toronto': [storage toronto cost] [storage toronto downtown] [storage toronto rates] [storage toronto leaside] [storage toronto prices] [storage toronto dupont] [storage toronto laird] [storage toronto eastern ave] [storage toronto ontario] Google adwords keyword tool results for these: <colgroup><col width="151"> <col width="129"> <col width="169"></colgroup>
Keyword Research | | adriandg
| Keyword | Global Monthly Searches | Local Monthly Searches |
| [storage toronto cost] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto downtown] | 36 | 28 |
| [storage toronto rates] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto leaside] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto prices] | 73 | 73 |
| [storage toronto dupont] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto laird] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto eastern ave] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto ontario] | 0 | 0 | So here is what i find confusing: If [storage toronto cost] is the top suggestion for [storage toronto...] then why does google say it has 0 monthly searches? Why isn't [storage toronto downtown] the first suggestion? or better yet, why isn't [storage toronto prices] the top suggestion? So either: 1) google adwords keyword tool is wrong. or 2) google suggest isn't based on just volume?? I've run these same keywords through Bing's Excel keyword information spreadsheet query and it came back saying all keywords had 0 searches ever, except for...drumroll: [storage toronto prices] with 7 monthly searches, once, in august, and 0 all other months. Now i assume that bing/yahoo numbers are significantly smaller, but this does show that that the same keyword is the most popular, so in some way suggests that google's keyword is accurate. So i guess this brings be back to my confusion, what other factors is google's suggest based on, because it obviously isn't primarily search volume. And yes, i have made sure to clear caches, and disable personalized search and search history, and tried the query in several browsers, just to double check i wasn't getting a personalized list, so we can rule that out. Thanks, Storwell.0