You do stuff, and show cute, tiny, illegible, photoshopped pictures, but do not explain how to actually DO anything useful. Or how to get any of the results. You leave out way too much….

Where, for example, is “More Search Tools”?
Where is “All Results”?
Where would “Related Searches” appear on my screen?
None of these things exist on my screen!
One would assume Google is the same everywhere?
Are you using an add-on you forgot to tell us about?
Are there certain setting changes you made to Google?
Then do please tell us about those.

Using an standard IBM, Win 7, Google Chrome, and a 22 inch monitor, I went to Google and keyed in “Heart Attack”.

NONE of the pictures you show, none of the suggestions, came up at all.

In fact what I see is so radically different that I am amazed! (I did not go on to the other examples. It was pointless to do so.)

I would type in what I get on my screen, but… Clearly, Google is not consistent, Go figure. I think I know know the meaning of the term filter bubbles….

I love theory, But I much prefer reality. Kindly do try to show the “hidden steps” in your next attempt. Or at least use some real world actual examples.

A proven way to learn, and to do science, is to reduplicate an experiment. Sadly this was not possible in this case.

But you did invent a neat bunch of jargon technical terms. Congratulate yourself on your creativity! Does nothing for the average guy, though.

I’d show you what my screen looks like, but there is no way to post that here.

Thanks for conducting a nice theoretical experiment.
Google should indeed make the changes you suggest for their browser and search engine….
Thanks for not showing intermediate steps.
Thanks for not using standard, out of the box, software or procedures….

Thanks for wasting my time. Thanks for frustrating me.
That is the problem with modern gurus. They assume we know all they do, and have done all they have. But then, what is the point of writing this up then?

The goal of teaching today, or demonstrating today, or posting anything on the net today, is not to show someone else how to do anything useful. It is to get paid for being clever and doing something no one else can. You succeeded there.

Had Christopher Columbus done this, the new world would not exist. His greatness was not in discovering anything. His greatness was in going back and telling people what he did, and telling them how they could go to this place also. The Vikings and the Chinese, and possibly the Egyptians, had both come and gone. What changed the game this one time, in 1492, was that someone came, and went back and told. And so now other people could do the same. Had he not done this, we would not be here today…

Yes, no tool is better than your brain. As I mention I use related searches to find modifiers and modifier classes which can then be used in a variety of ways.

In addition, you can often use related searches and/or Google Instant suggestions as supporting keywords within content with great effect. In fact, I have a client who saw a 10x increase in traffic after adding additional content to a post based on this type of research. Mind you, this is detail oriented and time-consuming work. But the rewards are there for those who persevere.

“Yet the most critical part is to apply your own analysis and to intelligently validate assumptions with other tool sets.”

I have been using this SEO ‘keyword expansion’ tactic for a while now with only a little success – so far anyway (every niche is different of course). Don’t get me wrong, as this is still very much a part of my keyword analysis regime. What I am saying is that so far (or at this stage in Google’s algo) I have found the Insights and Related Search results are more for ‘enhancing the users experience’ than an awesome untapped keyword list. So do you usual keyword research with your preferred tools as I find a lot of these ‘related keywords’ are not producing significant search volumes. On the other hand Google may reward your website for it’s ‘related’ content, but maybe not enough to warrant the optimisation work??

An interesting study I have been meaning to split test is to optimise for some of Google’s ‘Related Results’ or ‘Insights’ results which appear for a competitive keyword search term but do not necessarily return high search volume itself… May not produce great results now, but that could change with the next [Fluffy Animal] update…

I did a google search for “keyword tool” using the related searches modifier, and came up with a lot of really good results. http://bit.ly/JVw2mR