|
|
|
| A Review on the Search Engine Result Page (SERP) |
| Wu Dan, Tang Yuan |
| School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract This paper uses synthesis methods to examine foreign conference and journal articles that study search engine result page (SERP), and analyzes the research progress in this field. With respect to the research available on the layout design of SERPs, the results show that since the modern search engine aggregates the various types of information resources, the SERP is vertical and diversified in nature, and the embedded elements of the SERP affect the user’s satisfaction, attention, experience and evaluation of the SERP; on the other hand, using user-behavior data that includes eye movement, cursor movement, gestures, acoustics and other interactive data, it is possible to analyze the user-fixation areas and attention-distribution characteristics of the SERP to establish a user-attention prediction model, and to predict user intentions, attention, and the results of bias. Future directions mentioned in the literature include SERP layout design research extending to voice interaction, social networking, and other related fields, as well as more comprehensive interactive data support for user-seeking behavior modeling and attention prediction.
|
|
Received: 16 June 2017
|
|
|
|
[1] Rele R S, Duchowski A T.Using eye tracking to evaluate alternative search results interfaces[J]. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2005, 49(15): 1459-1463.
[2] Kammerer Y, Gerjets P.How the interface design influences users’ spontaneous trustworthiness evaluations of web search results: comparing a list and a grid interface[C]// Proceedings of the 2010 Symposium on Eye-Tracking Research & Applications. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 299-306.
[3] Ostergren M, Yu S Y, Efthimiadis E N.The value of visual elements in web search[C]// Proceedings of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 867-868.
[4] Woodruff A, Rosenholtz R, Morrison J B, et al.A comparison of the use of text summaries, plain thumbnails, and enhanced thumbnails for Web search tasks[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, 53(2): 172-185.
[5] Teevan J, Cutrell E, Fisher D, et al.Visual snippets: summarizing web pages for search and revisitation[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2009: 2023-2032.
[6] Loumakis F, Stumpf S, Grayson D.This image smells good: effects of image information scent in search engine results pages[C]// Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. New York: ACM Press, 2011: 475-484.
[7] Joho H, Jose J M.A comparative study of the effectiveness of search result presentation on the Web[C]// Proceedings of the European Conference on Advances in Information Retrieval. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2006: 302-313.
[8] Kim J, Thomas P, Sankaranarayana R, et al.What snippet size is needed in mobile Web search?[C]// Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2017: 97-106.
[9] Sweeney S, Crestani F.Effective search results summary size and device screen size: Is there a relationship?[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2006, 42(4): 1056-1074.
[10] Gossen T, Höbel J, Nürnberger A.A comparative study about children’s and adults’ perception of targeted web search engines[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2014: 1821-1824.
[11] Gossen T, Höbel J, Nürnberger A.Usability and perception of young users and adults on targeted web search engines[C]// Proceedings of the 5th Information Interaction in Context Symposium. New York: ACM Press, 2014: 18-27.
[12] Druin A, Foss E, Hutchinson H, et al.Children’s roles using keyword search interfaces at home[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 413-422.
[13] Bilal D, Gwizdka J. Children’s eye-fixations on google search results[C]// Proceedings of the 79th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Creating Knowledge, Enhancing Lives through Information & Technology. Silver Springs: American Society for Information Science, 2016: Article No. 89.
[14] Dinet J, Bastien J M C, Kitajima M. What, where and how are young people looking for in a search engine results page?: impact of typographical cues and prior domain knowledge[C]// Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on l’Interaction Homme-Machine. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 105-112.
[15] Lagun D, Hsieh C H, Webster D, et al.Towards better measurement of attention and satisfaction in mobile search[C]// Proceedings of the 37th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2014: 113-122.
[16] Liu Z Y, Liu Y Q, Zhou K, et al.Influence of vertical result in Web search examination[C]// Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2015: 193-202.
[17] Wang C, Liu Y Q, Zhang M, et al.Incorporating vertical results into search click models[C]// Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 503-512.
[18] Bar-Ilan J, Keenoy K, Levene M, et al.Presentation bias is significant in determining user preference for search results—A user study[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(1): 135-149.
[19] Zhou K, Cummins R, Lalmas M, et al.Evaluating aggregated search pages[C]// Proceedings of the 35th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2012: 115-124.
[20] Wang Y, Yin D W, Jie L, et al.Beyond ranking: Optimizing whole-page presentation[C]// Proceedings of the Ninth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. New York: ACM Press, 2016: 103-112.
[21] Kiseleva J, Williams K, Awadallah A H, et al.Predicting user satisfaction with intelligent assistants[C]// Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2016: 45-54.
[22] Kiseleva J, Williams K, Jiang J P, et al.Understanding user satisfaction with intelligent assistants[C]// Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2016: 121-130.
[23] Jones M, Marsden G, Mohd-Nasir N, et al.Improving Web interaction on small displays[J]. Computer Networks, 1999, 31(11-16): 1129-1137.
[24] Dillon A, Richardson J, McKnight C. The effects of display size and text splitting on reading lengthy text from screen[J]. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1990, 9(3): 215-227.
[25] Duchnicky R L, Kolers P A.Readability of text scrolled on visual display terminals as a function of window size[J]. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1983, 25(6): 683-692.
[26] Kim J, Thomas P, Sankaranarayana R, et al.Eye-tracking analysis of user behavior and performance in web search on large and small screens[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015, 66(3): 526-544.
[27] Kelly D, Azzopardi L.How many results per page?: A study of SERP size, search behavior and user experience[C]// Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2015: 183-192.
[28] Oulasvirta A, Hukkinen J P, Schwartz B.When more is less: the paradox of choice in search engine use[C]// Proceedings of the 32nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2009: 516-523.
[29] Kim J.User interaction in mobile Web search[C]// Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New Yrok: ACM Press, 2016: 1189.
[30] Raptis D, Tselios N, Kjeldskov J, et al.Does size matter?: Investigating the impact of mobile phone screen size on users’ perceived usability, effectiveness and efficiency[C]// Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. New Yrok: ACM Press, 2013: 127-136.
[31] Kim J, Thomas P, Sankaranarayana R, et al.Pagination versus scrolling in mobile Web search[C]// Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. New York: ACM Press, 2016: 751-760.
[32] Jones M, Buchanan G, Thimbleby H.Improving web search on small screen devices[J]. Interacting with Computers, 2003, 15(4): 479-495.
[33] Granka L, Feusner M, Lorigo L.Eye monitoring in online search[M]// Hammoud R (eds). Passive Eye Monitoring, Signals and Communication Technology. Berlin: Springer, 2008: 347-372.
[34] Schwartz B.The paradox of choice: why more is less[M]. Grand Haven: Harper Perennial, 2005.
[35] Joachims T, Granka L, Pan B, et al. Evaluating the accuracy of implicit feedback from clicks and query reformulations in Web search[J]. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 2007, 25(2): Article No. 7.
[36] Guan Z W, Cutrell E.An eye tracking study of the effect of target rank on web search[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2007: 417-420.
[37] Buscher G, Dumais S T, Cutrell E.The good, the bad, and the random: an eye-tracking study of ad quality in web search[C]// Proceedings of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 42-49.
[38] Rodden K, Fu X.Exploring how mouse movements relate to eye movements on Web search results pages[J]. SIGIR Workshop on Web Information Seeking & Interaction, 2007: 29-32.
[39] Ostergren M, Yu S Y, Efthimiadis E N.The value of visual elements in web search[C]// Proceeding of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 867-868.
[40] Kaisser M, Hearst M A, Lowe J B.Improving search results quality by customizing summary lengths[C]// Proceedings of ACL-08. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2008: 701-709.
[41] Metrikov P, Diaz F, Lahaie S, et al.Whole page optimization: how page elements interact with the position auction[C]// Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. New York: ACM Press, 2014: 583-600.
[42] Capra R, Arguello J, Scholer F.Augmenting web search surrogates with images[C]// Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 399-408.
[43] Cutrell E, Guan Z W.What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2007: 407-416.
[44] Bota H.Nonlinear composite search results[C]// Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2016: 345-347.
[45] Sushmita S, Joho H, Lalmas M, et al.Factors affecting click-through behavior in aggregated search interfaces[C]// Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 519-528.
[46] Huang J, White R, Buscher G.User see, user point: gaze and cursor alignment in web search[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2012: 1341-1350.
[47] Rodden K, Fu X, Aula A, et al.Eye-mouse coordination patterns on web search results pages[C]// Proceedings of the Conference on Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2008: 2997-3002.
[48] Navalpakkam V, Churchill E.Mouse tracking: Measuring and predicting users’ experience of web-based content[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2012: 2963-2972.
[49] Navalpakkam V, Jentzsch L D, Sayres R, et al.Measurement and modeling of eye-mouse behavior in the presence of nonlinear page layouts[C]// Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 953-964.
[50] Chen M C, Anderson J R, Sohn M H.What can a mouse cursor tell us more?: correlation of eye/mouse movements on web browsing[C]// Proceedings of the Conference on Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2001: 281-282.
[51] Huang J, White R W, Dumais S.No clicks, no problem: using cursor movements to understand and improve search[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2011: 1225-1234.
[52] Guo Q, Agichtein E.Towards predicting web searcher gaze position from mouse movements[C]// Proceedings of the Conference on Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 3601-3606.
[53] Guo Q, Agichtein E.Exploring mouse movements for inferring query intent[C]// Proceedings of the 31st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2008: 707-708.
[54] Hotchkiss G, Alston S, Edwards G.Eye tracking study[R/OL]. Enquiro Search Solutions Inc.[2018-04-04]. https://searchengineland.com/figz/wp-content/seloads/2007/09/hotchkiss-eye-tracking-2005.pdf.
[55] Nielsen J, Pernice K.Eyetracking web usability[M]. Thousand Oaks: New Riders Publishing, 2009.
[56] Guo Q, Jin H J, Lagun D, et al.Towards estimating web search result relevance from touch interactions on mobile devices[C]// Proceedings of the Conference on Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 1821-1826.
[57] Guo Q, Jin H J, Lagun D, et al.Mining touch interaction data on mobile devices to predict web search result relevance[C]// Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 153-162.
[58] Buscher G, Cutrell E, Morris M R.What do you see when you’re surfing?: using eye tracking to predict salient regions of web pages[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2009: 21-30.
[59] Guo Q, Agichtein E.Ready to buy or just browsing?: detecting web searcher goals from interaction data[C]// Proceeding of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2010: 130-137.
[60] Diaz F, White R, Buscher G, et al.Robust models of mouse movement on dynamic web search results pages[C]// Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 1451-1460.
[61] Lagun D, Agichtein E.Inferring searcher attention by jointly modeling user interactions and content salience[C]// Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2015: 483-492. |
|
|
|
