Abstract

Previous research shows that users tend to change their assessment of search results over time. This is a first study that investigates the factors and reasons for these changes, and describes a stochastic model of user behaviour that may explain these changes. In particular, we hypothesise that most of the changes are local, i.e. between results with similar or close relevance to the query, and thus belong to the same”coarse” relevance category. According to the theory of coarse beliefs and categorical thinking, humans tend to divide the range of values under consideration into coarse categories, and are thus able to distinguish only between cross-category values but not within them. To test this hypothesis we conducted five experiments with about 120 subjects divided into 3 groups. Each student in every group was asked to rank and assign relevance scores to the same set of search results over two or three rounds, with a period of three to nine weeks between each round. The subjects of the last three-round experiment were then exposed to the differences in their judgements and were asked to explain them. We make use of a Markov chain model to measure change in users’ judgments between the different rounds. The Markov chain demonstrates that the changes converge, and that a majority of the changes are local to a neighbouring relevance category. We found that most of the subjects were satisfied with their changes, and did not perceive them as mistakes but rather as a legitimate phenomenon, since they believe that time has influenced their relevance assessment. Both our quantitative analysis and user comments support the hypothesis of the existence of coarse relevance categories resulting from categorical thinking in the context of user evaluation of search results.

Highlights

  • Previous research reveals quite a high level of disagreement between the ranking of search engines and user-produced rankings [1, 2]

  • Users cannot generally distinguish between results that fall into the same coarse category, for example users may consider “relevant” results as being a coarse category, and will not change their minds concerning the relevance of a results between a first round of relevance assessment and a second one occurring at a later time, despite a small, “local”, shift in opinion regarding the relevance of the result

  • To analyse the results of the experiments we investigate whether two types of patterns of user behaviour from coarse beliefs theory hold for the case of evaluation of search results: (1) coarseness and (2) locality

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Previous research reveals quite a high level of disagreement between the ranking of search engines and user-produced rankings [1, 2]. Users cannot generally distinguish between results that fall into the same coarse category, for example users may consider “relevant” results as being a coarse category, and will not change their minds concerning the relevance of a results between a first round of relevance assessment and a second one occurring at a later time, despite a small, “local”, shift in opinion regarding the relevance of the result. This type of local category changes does not reflect a change in user opinion regarding the judged search result. This implies that, results are grouped into these categories, such that all the results inside a category are evaluated as having comparable relevance

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.