DOCSLIB.ORG

A Look Back and Into the Potential Future of Search

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

A Look Back and into the Potential Future of Search Second Annual Conference on Competition, Search and Social Greg Sterling May 16, 2012 About Me • Jobs: lawyer, editor, startups, analyst, blogger • Coverage: “SoLoMo” • “The impact of the Internet on offline consumer buying” • Twitter: @gsterling Quick Audience Poll • What is your primary search engine? • Do you search on a mobile device? Search as popular as email Pew Internet & American Life Project, March 2012 (N=2,253 adults) „Gateway to the internet‟ “The Google” The consumer Content audience A Little History A brief history of search • 1990 – 1993: Archie, Vlib, Excite, Aliweb (early directories) • 1994 – 1997: Infoseek, Webcrawler, AltaVista, Yahoo, Hotbot, AskJeeves, Looksmart, Inktomi, Lycos • 1998 – 2001: Google, Overture, DMOZ, AllTheWeb • 2002 – present: MSFT Live Search, Powerset, Cuil, Bing (2009), Blekko, DuckDuckGo • 2013 – Facebook? Google circa 1998 A quick chronology of Google • 1996: Brin& Page (@stanford) develop “BackRub” – the original “social search engine” (PageRank) • 1997: BackRub renamed Google • 1998: Google launches • 1999: Google gets funding, AOL selects Google as search partner • 2000: Google replaces Inktomi to power Yahoo search • 2002: Google launches AdWords, Yahoo offers to buy Google • 2003: Google launches AdSense (Applied Semantics) • 2005 – 2010: Google buys YouTube, DoubleClick, Android, AdMob Google #1 or #2 global brand Brand Finance ranking, 2011 Search the biggest piece of online pie IAB FY 2011 analysis released 4/12 Key initiatives for Google • Social search: using “social signals” to help determine relevance and order search results (+1, Google+) • Personalization: using your web history and network to determine results/ranking (component of social) • Universal search: providing “answers” and rich (vertical) content in search results rather than just “links” • Mobile search: adapting PC search for different form factors (voice, visual search, scanning) • Local search/maps (especially for mobile) • Speed & spam fighting Google today (with Knowledge Graph) Real-time search: the trend that wasn‟t 2009 – 2011: • Collecta • CrowdEye • Summize • Topsy • OneRiot • Tweetmeme • Scoopler Google, Bing and Yahoo “co-opted” this trend by incorporating the Twitter feed into their results. But this created a poor user experience Official market share numbers US April Search Market Share (comScore) Google 66.5% Bing 15.4% Yahoo 13.5% Ask 3.0% AOL 1.6% comScore “qSearch” data, April 2012 Search engine people use „most often‟ 2004 2012 8% 5% 6% 6% 19% Google Google 47% Yahoo Yahoo Other Other None/DK None/DK 26% 83% Pew Internet & American Life Project, surveys: 2004, 2012 n=2,000+ US adults Users having mostly positive experiences Pew Internet & American Life Project 2012 n=2,000+ US adults Survey: like search, not personalization People like search … • 66% think search results “fair and unbiased” • Over 50% think search results are getting better But . • 65% see “personalized search” as a bad thing • 73%: not OK to collect user info to personalize results • 68% disapprove of (behavioral) ad targeting Pew Internet & American Life Project 2012 n=2,000+ US adults Social Search The battle over social search Google efforts to be more social • Google CEO Larry Page has become preoccupied with Facebook and the apparent threat it poses • Google Buzz (failed; 20 years of FTC privacy audits) • +1 button: Google’s answer to Like button • Google+ 170 million users but limited engagement? • New privacy policy (collect/analyze more data) Evolution of Google social search • Google introduced “social search” in 2009, which annotated traditional SERP with relevant content from one’s “social circle” as determined by Google • Search Plus Your World (1/12) introduced more personalization social content directly into search results The „New Bing‟ with Sidebar Integrates Facebook, Twitter onto the page The (Human) Q&A Engines Mobile Search US PC internet access has plateaued Pew Internet & American Life Project 2012 n=2,000+ US adults Mobile devices outselling PCs Source: IDC, March 2012 Mobile as primary internet device • Pew 2012 survey: 25% of smartphone-owning survey respondents said that their mobile devices were their primary Internet access method • More likely: young adults, minorities, those with no college experience, and those with lower household income levels • Opus Research: 17.6% preferred mobile devices (smartphone/tablet) as their primary Internet access device (laptop was top choice) Pew Internet & American Life Project 2012 n=2,000+ US adults; Opus Research 4/12, n=1,502 US adults Analysts: Android OS will dominate Global Smartphone OS Market Share 2011 2015 45.4% 39.5% 20.9% 20.9% 15.7%15.3% 14.9%13.7% 5.5% 3.5%4.6% 0.2% Android RIM Apple/iOS Symbian Windows Others Source: IDC, March 2012 Google dominates mobile search Mobile search market share 97.23 Google 94.79 1.79 Yahoo! 3.59 0.64 Bing 1.4 Global US Market YANDEX RU 0.16 0.13 Ask Jeeves 0.18 0.32 Other 0.04 Source: StatCounter, May 2012 Apps dominate mobile engagement • comScore (5/12): “4 in every 5 mobile media minutes” is spent with apps (vs. the mobile browser) • Mobile time spent with FB: 80% in app, 20% in the browser More time w/mobile apps than PC Flurry Analytics Q4 2011 Google‟s mobile search sources We’ve seen data that shows that while Google absolutely dominates searches emanating from the iPhone (95%+), ~50% of iPhone Google searches come from the toolbar, 42% from Google’s homepage and less than 10% from Google‟s app. -- Macquarie Group, March, 2011 Voice & Virtual Assistants Google voice actions/search 25% of Android-based Google searches in the US market are initiated by voice . -- Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt (2010) Enter Siri the virtual assistant • Not a “speech technology” • A natural- language understanding technology developed by SRI International, which was funded by DARPA • Breakthrough product Siri usage • 87% of iPhone4S owners use Siri at least monthly • 30%+ use Siri “almost daily” • 26% use Siri to send email daily • Initiating calls/texts most common Siri-related activities • 55% satisfied with Siri • 9% unsatisfied Parks Associates, March 2012 (n=482 iPhone 4S owners) Siri most popular feature of iPhone What do you like best about iPhone 4s? Siri 49% Ease of use 39% 8MP camera 33% Faster web browsing 24% Screen resolution 23% iCloud 19% 3rd party apps 13% Ability to sync with multiple PCs 11% Multitasking 11% ChangeWave, November 2011, n=215 Apple iPhone 4S owners Siri before Apple was transactional Taps into APIs/verticals. In “ideal” scenario it renders general “web search” unnecessary Other „assistants‟ Beyond Siri there are a range of “assistants” that claim varying degrees of “AI”: • Assistant (Speaktoit) • Evi (TrueKnowledge) • Kngine • IRIS • Several in enterprise: Indisys, Anboto, NextIT, Artificial Solutions Assessing the Threats to Search (Google) Assistant sits on top of search • Combination of NLU and semantic speech processing with “artificial intelligence” – and a pleasing UI is a potential successor to current search engines • Google inserted itself between publishers/content producers and end users • Assistant could become primary for users and reduce Google to one of many data providers • Assistants could tap directly into vertical or branded content via APIs; eliminate need for “search” except where no alternative Apple to get into map-based search Apple has acquired three mapping companies: • Placebase (in 2009) • Quebec-based Poly9, a Google Earth-like product (2010) • C3 Technologies (2011) Apple about to launch own maps and local search capability Facebook search terrible today Will be forced to launch better product Threats to Google • Speech driven “AI” assistants become the primary entry point to a wide range of functions and content - Google’s brand and relationship with consumer weakened - Google will mitigate with own assistant and Android OS - Google default backfill for assistants • Mobile shift: substantial “search” and internet usage shifts to mobile and devices Google doesn’t control (i.e., iPad) - Google less central in mobile context - Apps a primary consumer access point to content - Google becomes secondary • Facebook enters search market in earnest Over the next 3 years Next 3 years • Mobile continues gains (smartphone, tablet) • More “AI”/assistant development • Search continues to “diversify” from its original form as a “query in a box” • Search Uis and entry points grow: - Voice - Camera (AR) - In-car - Map (around me) - Clothes (glasses)? QuestionsFollow or Contact Me Greg Sterling [email protected] Twitter.com/gsterling.
Recommended publications
  • Metadata for Semantic and Social Applications

    Metadata for Semantic and Social Applications

    etadata is a key aspect of our evolving infrastructure for information management, social computing, and scientific collaboration. DC-2008M will focus on metadata challenges, solutions, and innovation in initiatives and activities underlying semantic and social applications. Metadata is part of the fabric of social computing, which includes the use of wikis, blogs, and tagging for collaboration and participation. Metadata also underlies the development of semantic applications, and the Semantic Web — the representation and integration of multimedia knowledge structures on the basis of semantic models. These two trends flow together in applications such as Wikipedia, where authors collectively create structured information that can be extracted and used to enhance access to and use of information sources. Recent discussion has focused on how existing bibliographic standards can be expressed as Semantic Metadata for Web vocabularies to facilitate the ingration of library and cultural heritage data with other types of data. Harnessing the efforts of content providers and end-users to link, tag, edit, and describe their Semantic and information in interoperable ways (”participatory metadata”) is a key step towards providing knowledge environments that are scalable, self-correcting, and evolvable. Social Applications DC-2008 will explore conceptual and practical issues in the development and deployment of semantic and social applications to meet the needs of specific communities of practice. Edited by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas DC-2008
  • Internet Economy 25 Years After .Com

    Internet Economy 25 Years After .Com

    THE INTERNET ECONOMY 25 YEARS AFTER .COM TRANSFORMING COMMERCE & LIFE March 2010 25Robert D. Atkinson, Stephen J. Ezell, Scott M. Andes, Daniel D. Castro, and Richard Bennett THE INTERNET ECONOMY 25 YEARS AFTER .COM TRANSFORMING COMMERCE & LIFE March 2010 Robert D. Atkinson, Stephen J. Ezell, Scott M. Andes, Daniel D. Castro, and Richard Bennett The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation I Ac KNOW L EDGEMEN T S The authors would like to thank the following individuals for providing input to the report: Monique Martineau, Lisa Mendelow, and Stephen Norton. Any errors or omissions are the authors’ alone. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Dr. Robert D. Atkinson is President of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Stephen J. Ezell is a Senior Analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Scott M. Andes is a Research Analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Daniel D. Castro is a Senior Analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Richard Bennett is a Research Fellow at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. ABOUT THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION FOUNDATION The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) is a Washington, DC-based think tank at the cutting edge of designing innovation policies and exploring how advances in technology will create new economic opportunities to improve the quality of life. Non-profit, and non-partisan, we offer pragmatic ideas that break free of economic philosophies born in eras long before the first punch card computer and well before the rise of modern China and pervasive globalization. ITIF, founded in 2006, is dedicated to conceiving and promoting the new ways of thinking about technology-driven productivity, competitiveness, and globalization that the 21st century demands.
  • Internet Pro Za Č Ínající Uživatele

    Internet Pro Za Č Ínající Uživatele

    Gymnázium Františka Živného INFORMAČNÍ CENTRUM 2/2004 INTERNET PRO ZAČ ÍNAJÍCÍ UŽIVATELE DISTANČ NÍ TEXT Bohumín 2004 TOMÁŠ HUDEC OBSAH PŘ EDMĚ TU Úvod........................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Připojme se..................................................................................................................... 4 2. Prohlížíme stránky.......................................................................................................... 6 3. Hledání v kupce sena.................................................................................................... 10 4. Elektronická pošta ....................................................................................................... 16 2 ÚVOD Text je určen široké pedagogické veřejnosti z řad učitelů „ neinformatiků“, kteří chtějí získat základní informace z oblasti Internetu a chtějí pokud možnost studovat sami v čase, který jim vyhovuje a v prostředí, kde se cítí dobře, nemusí se stresovat a mohou pracovat svým tempem.. Text je napsán distanční formou a může být studován jak samostatně, tak v případě otevření příslušného kurzu pod vedením lektora. Text je oproštěn od obecných informací a je směrován k praktické činnosti čtenáře či frekventanta kurzu. Hlubší studium a někdy i odpovědi na otázky předpokládají další studium literatury nebo vyhledávání informací právě z Internetu. Po prostudování textu budete znát: • Co je to Internet a jak se připojit • Jaké jsou základní
  • Market Research SD-5 Gathering Information About Commercial Products and Services

    Market Research SD-5 Gathering Information About Commercial Products and Services

    Market Research SD-5 Gathering Information About Commercial Products and Services DEFENSE STANDARDIZATION PROGRA M JANUARY 2008 Contents Foreword 1 The Market Research Other Considerations 32 Background 2 Process 13 Amount of Information Strategic Market Research to Gather 32 What Is Market Research? 2 (Market Surveillance) 14 Procurement Integrity Act 32 Why Do Market Research? 2 Identify the Market or Market Paperwork Reduction Act 33 Segment of Interest 14 When Is Market Research Cost of Market Research 34 Done? 5 Identify Sources of Market Information 16 Who Should Be Involved In Market Research? 7 Collect Relevant Market Other Information Information 17 Technical Specialist 8 Document the Results 18 on Market Research 35 User 9 Logistics Specialist 9 Tactical Market Research Appendix A 36 (Market Investigation) 19 Testing Specialist 9 Types of Information Summarize Strategic Market Available on the Internet Cost Analyst 10 Research 19 Legal Counsel 10 Formulate Requirements 20 Appendix B 39 Contracting Officer 10 Web-Based Information Identify Sources of Sources Information 21 Guiding Principles 11 Collect Product or Service Appendix C 47 Examples of Tactical Start Early 11 Information from Sources 22 Collect Information from Information Define and Document Product or Service Users 26 Requirements 11 Evaluate the Data 27 Refine as You Proceed 12 Document the Results 30 Tailor the Investigation 12 Repeat as Necessary 12 Communicate 12 Involve Users 12 Foreword The Department of Defense (DoD) relies extensively on the commercial market for the products and services it needs, whether those products and services are purely commercial, modified for DoD use from commercial products and services, or designed specifically for DoD.
  • Awareness and Utilization of Search Engines for Information Retrieval by Students of National Open University of Nigeria in Enugu Study Centre Library

    Awareness and Utilization of Search Engines for Information Retrieval by Students of National Open University of Nigeria in Enugu Study Centre Library

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 2020 Awareness and Utilization of Search Engines for Information Retrieval by Students of National Open University of Nigeria in Enugu Study Centre Library SUNDAY JUDE ONUH National Open University of Nigeria, [email protected] OGOEGBUNAM LOVETH EKWUEME National Open University of Nigeria, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac Part of the Library and Information Science Commons ONUH, SUNDAY JUDE and EKWUEME, OGOEGBUNAM LOVETH, "Awareness and Utilization of Search Engines for Information Retrieval by Students of National Open University of Nigeria in Enugu Study Centre Library" (2020). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 4650. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/4650 Awareness and Utilization of Search Engines for Information Retrieval by Students of National Open University of Nigeria in Enugu Study Centre Library By Jude Sunday Onuh Enugu Study Centre Library National Open University of Nigeria [email protected] & Loveth Ogoegbunam Ekwueme Department of Library and Information Science National Open University of Nigeria [email protected] Abstract This study dwelt on awareness and utilization of search engines for information retrieval by students of National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) Enugu Study centre. Descriptive survey research was adopted for the study. Two research questions were drawn from the two purposes that guided the study. The population consists of 5855 undergraduate students of NOUN Enugu Study Centre. A sample size of 293 students was used as 5% of the entire population.
  • A Study on Vertical and Broad-Based Search Engines

    A Study on Vertical and Broad-Based Search Engines

    International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology IJLTET Special Issue- ICRACSC-2016 , pp.087-093 e-ISSN: 2278-621X A STUDY ON VERTICAL AND BROAD-BASED SEARCH ENGINES M.Swathi1 and M.Swetha2 Abstract-Vertical search engines or Domain-specific search engines[1][2] are becoming increasingly popular because they offer increased accuracy and extra features not possible with general, Broad-based search engines or Web-wide search engines. The paper focuses on the survey of domain specific search engine which is becoming more popular as compared to Web- Wide Search Engines as they are difficult to maintain and time consuming .It is also difficult to provide appropriate documents to represent the target data. We also listed various vertical search engines and Broad-based search engines. Index terms: Domain specific search, vertical search engines, broad based search engines. I. INTRODUCTION The Web has become a very rich source of information for almost any field, ranging from music to histories, from sports to movies, from science to culture, and many more. However, it has become increasingly difficult to search for desired information on the Web. Users are facing the problem of information overload , in which a search on a general-purpose search engine such as Google (www.google.com) results in thousands of hits.Because a user cannot specify a search domain (e.g. medicine, music), a search query may bring up Web pages both within and outside the desired domain. Example 1: A user searching for “cancer” may get Web pages related to the disease as well as those related to the Zodiac sign.
  • 60 � ENTREPRENEUR in the Click by Catherine Seda

    60 ENTREPRENEUR in the Click by Catherine Seda

    SEARCHING FOR SALES: Nacho Hernandez knows that thinking like your customers is key to successfully marketing via search engines. 60 I ENTREPRENEUR In the Click By Catherine Seda ou can’t resist the temptation. Fixated on ample, if you type a keyword into MSN Search your computer screen, you anxiously type on Microsoft’s consumer information and enter- Ykeywords relevant to your business into tainment site (www.msn.com), the Web site list- your favorite search engine. A list of search results ings displayed could be from Inktomi, Microsoft appears. You cringe as you spot several competitors, or Overture. Overture provides search results not then grumble because your company’s Web site only to MSN Search, but also to AltaVista and is nowhere to be seen. Where is it? That depends. Yahoo! Could a top site on Overture then appear Where is your search engine marketing strategy? as a top site on a distribution partner’s site? Yes. Gone are the days Unfortunately, these distribution relationships when adding keywords change frequently, making it difficult to deter- want all the right people to in meta tags to your mine exactly where results come from. site produced rankings. The challenging part, however, is figuring out how notice your business? then you Search engine marketing to land a top position in the search engines. There has evolved into a com- are two complementary yet completely different plex and competitive types of methods: optimization and advertising. need to make the most of today’s program. It’s also prof- Search engine optimization (SEO) refers to en- itable—according to a hancing your Web site design to make it more ap- March 2003 report by pealing to crawler-based search engines.
  • Evaluation of Web-Based Search Engines Using User-Effort Measures

    Evaluation of Web-Based Search Engines Using User-Effort Measures

    Evaluation of Web-Based Search Engines Using User-Effort Measures Muh-Chyun Tang and Ying Sun 4 Huntington St. School of Information, Communication and Library Studies Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, U.S.A. [email protected] [email protected] Abstract This paper presents a study of the applicability of three user-effort-sensitive evaluation measures —“first 20 full precision,” “search length,” and “rank correlation”—on four Web-based search engines (Google, AltaVista, Excite and Metacrawler). The authors argue that these measures are better alternatives than precision and recall in Web search situations because of their emphasis on the quality of ranking. Eight sets of search topics were collected from four Ph.D. students in four different disciplines (biochemistry, industrial engineering, economics, and urban planning). Each participant was asked to provide two topics along with the corresponding query terms. Their relevance and credibility judgment of the Web pages were then used to compare the performance of the search engines using these three measures. The results show consistency among these three ranking evaluation measures, more so between “first 20 full precision” and search length than between rank correlation and the other two measures. Possible reasons for rank correlation’s disagreement with the other two measures are discussed. Possible future research to improve these measures is also addressed. Introduction The explosive growth of information on the World Wide Web poses a challenge to traditional information retrieval (IR) research. Other than the sheer amount of information, some structural factors make searching for relevant and quality information on the Web a formidable task.
  • Risk Management Resolutions Easier Than a Diet; Good for the Health of Your Nonprofit by Melanie L

    Risk Management Resolutions Easier Than a Diet; Good for the Health of Your Nonprofit by Melanie L

    A publication of the Nonprofit Risk Management Center Volume 14, No. 1, January/February 2005 Risk Management Resolutions Easier than a diet; good for the health of your nonprofit by Melanie L. Herman ere you one of thousands dilemma you’re facing and the of Americans who received a solution we recommend. To W gym membership gift tucked access this free service, visit neatly in a card from a loved one? www.nonprofitrisk.org and Across the country millions of click on the ADVICE tab. Or Americans are jotting down resolutions, give us a call at (202) 785-3891. most of which have something to do with the three Cs: calories, cardio- Resolution #1 workouts, or carcinogens. Blow the Dust off Resolutions about the three health- inducing Cs are awfully tough to keep, Your Policies as are risk management resolutions that Throughout the year the could change the health of your Nonprofit Risk Management nonprofit. Does the organization you Center receives phone calls from serve have a mission worth preserving? chief financial officers, Are there any risks lurking in your continued on page 2 nonprofit’s future that could spell significant set-back or disaster? Are you losing any sleep about risks related to HR, financial management, fundraising, NEW! Risk Management Essentials Series reputation, or staff/participant injuries? This article offers some simple but Visit www.nonprofitrisk.org to check out a important Risk Management special offer from the Nonprofit Risk Resolutions for 2005. The resolutions can be easily adapted to reflect the Management Center. The Risk Management circumstances and resources of your Essentials Series takes the guesswork out of nonprofit.
  • Informa2on Retrieval

    Informa2on Retrieval

    Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Brief (non‐technical) history . Early keyword‐based engines ca. 1995‐1997 Introducon to . Altavista, Excite, Infoseek, Inktomi, Lycos Informaon Retrieval . Paid search ranking: Goto (morphed into Overture.com → Yahoo!) CS276 . Your search ranking depended on how much you Informaon Retrieval and Web Search paid Pandu Nayak and Prabhakar Raghavan . Aucon for keywords: casino was expensive! Lecture 15: Web search basics 2 Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Brief (non‐technical) history . 1998+: Link‐based ranking pioneered by Google . Blew away all early engines save Inktomi . Great user experience in search of a business model . Meanwhile Goto/Overture’s annual revenues were nearing $1 billion Paid . Result: Google added paid search “ads” to the side, Search Ads independent of search results . Yahoo followed suit, acquiring Overture (for paid placement) and Inktomi (for search) . 2005+: Google gains search share, dominang in Europe and very strong in North America . 2009: Yahoo! and Microso propose combined paid search offering Algorithmic results. 3 4 Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Sec. 19.4.1 Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Sec. 19.4.1 Web search basics User Needs . Need [Brod02, RL04] User . Informaonal – want to learn about something (~40% / 65%) . Navigaonal – want to go to that page (~25% / 15%) Web spider . Transaconal – want to do something (web‐mediated) (~35% / 20%) . Access a service . Downloads Search . Shop Indexer . Gray areas . Find a good hub . Exploratory search “see what’s there” The Web Indexes Ad indexes5 6 1 Introducon to Informaon Retrieval Introducon to Informaon Retrieval How far do people look for results? Users’ empirical evaluaon of results .
  • Gender and Information Literacy: Evaluation of Gender Differences in a Student Survey of Information Sources

    Gender and Information Literacy: Evaluation of Gender Differences in a Student Survey of Information Sources

    Gender and Information Literacy: Evaluation of Gender Differences in a Student Survey of Information Sources Arthur Taylor and Heather A. Dalal Information literacy studies have shown that college students use a va- riety of information sources to perform research and commonly choose Internet sources over traditional library sources. Studies have also shown that students do not appear to understand the information quality issues concerning Internet information sources and may lack the information literacy skills to make good choices concerning the use of these sources. No studies currently provide clear guidance on how gender might influ- ence the information literacy skills of students. Such guidance could help improve information literacy instruction. This study used a survey of college-aged students to evaluate a subset of student information literacy skills in relation to Internet information sources. Analysis of the data collected provided strong indications of gender differences in information literacy skills. Female respondents ap- peared to be more discerning than males in evaluating Internet sources. Males appeared to be more confident in the credibility and accuracy of the results returned by search engines. Evaluation of other survey responses strengthened our finding of gender differentiation in informa- tion literacy skills. ollege students today have come of age surrounded by a sea of information delivered from an array of sources available at their fingertips at any time of the day or night. Studies have shown that the most common source of information for college-aged students is the Internet. Information gathered in this environment is most likely found using a commercial search engine that returns sources of dubious quality using an unknown algorithm.
  • How to Choose a Search Engine Or Directory

    How to Choose a Search Engine Or Directory

    How to Choose a Search Engine or Directory Fields & File Types If you want to search for... Choose... Audio/Music AllTheWeb | AltaVista | Dogpile | Fazzle | FindSounds.com | Lycos Music Downloads | Lycos Multimedia Search | Singingfish Date last modified AllTheWeb Advanced Search | AltaVista Advanced Web Search | Exalead Advanced Search | Google Advanced Search | HotBot Advanced Search | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Domain/Site/URL AllTheWeb Advanced Search | AltaVista Advanced Web Search | AOL Advanced Search | Google Advanced Search | Lycos Advanced Search | MSN Search Search Builder | SearchEdu.com | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search File Format AllTheWeb Advanced Web Search | AltaVista Advanced Web Search | AOL Advanced Search | Exalead Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Geographic location Exalead Advanced Search | HotBot Advanced Search | Lycos Advanced Search | MSN Search Search Builder | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Images AllTheWeb | AltaVista | The Amazing Picture Machine | Ditto | Dogpile | Fazzle | Google Image Search | IceRocket | Ixquick | Mamma | Picsearch Language AllTheWeb Advanced Web Search | AOL Advanced Search | Exalead Advanced Search | Google Language Tools | HotBot Advanced Search | iBoogie Advanced Web Search | Lycos Advanced Search | MSN Search Search Builder | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Multimedia & video All TheWeb | AltaVista | Dogpile | Fazzle | IceRocket | Singingfish | Yahoo Video Search Page Title/URL AOL Advanced