Searching, browsing, and clicking in a search session: changes in user behavior by task and over time

There are many existing studies of user behavior in simple tasks (e.g., navigational and informational search) within a short duration of 1--2 queries. However, we know relatively little about user behavior, especially browsing and clicking behavior, for longer search session solving complex search tasks. In this paper, we characterize and compare user behavior in relatively long search sessions (10 minutes; about 5 queries) for search tasks of four different types. The tasks differ in two dimensions: (1) the user is locating facts or is pursuing intellectual understanding of a topic; (2) the user has a specific task goal or has an ill-defined and undeveloped goal. We analyze how search behavior as well as browsing and clicking patterns change during a search session in these different tasks. Our results indicate that user behavior in the four types of tasks differ in various aspects, including search activeness, browsing style, clicking strategy, and query reformulation. As a search session progresses, we note that users shift their interests to focus less on the top results but more on results ranked at lower positions in browsing. We also found that results eventually become less and less attractive for the users. The reasons vary and include downgraded search performance of query, decreased novelty of search results, and decaying persistence of users in browsing. Our study highlights the lack of long session support in existing search engines and suggests different strategies of supporting longer sessions according to different task types.

[1]  Alistair Moffat,et al.  What Users Do: The Eyes Have It , 2013, AIRS.

[2]  Olivier Chapelle,et al.  Expected reciprocal rank for graded relevance , 2009, CIKM.

[3]  Charles L. A. Clarke,et al.  The influence of caption features on clickthrough patterns in web search , 2007, SIGIR.

[4]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Real life, real users, and real needs: a study and analysis of user queries on the web , 2000, Inf. Process. Manag..

[5]  Alistair Moffat,et al.  Rank-biased precision for measurement of retrieval effectiveness , 2008, TOIS.

[6]  Parosh Aziz Abdulla,et al.  The Good, the Bad, and the Random , 2007 .

[7]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  The good, the bad, and the random: an eye-tracking study of ad quality in web search , 2010, SIGIR.

[8]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  The influence of task and gender on search and evaluation behavior using Google , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[10]  Jaime Arguello,et al.  Grannies, tanning beds, tattoos and NASCAR: evaluation of search tasks with varying levels of cognitive complexity , 2012, IIiX.

[11]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback , 2005, SIGIR '05.

[12]  Lois M. L. Delcambre,et al.  Discounted Cumulated Gain Based Evaluation of Multiple-Query IR Sessions , 2008, ECIR.

[13]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Task and user effects on reading patterns in information search , 2011, Interact. Comput..

[14]  Alistair Moffat,et al.  Users versus models: what observation tells us about effectiveness metrics , 2013, CIKM.

[15]  Edward Cutrell,et al.  An eye tracking study of the effect of target rank on web search , 2007, CHI.

[16]  Ben Carterette,et al.  Evaluating multi-query sessions , 2011, SIGIR.

[17]  Ben Carterette,et al.  Overview of the TREC 2012 Session Track , 2012, TREC.

[18]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Search behaviors in different task types , 2010, JCDL '10.

[19]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Exploratory Search: Beyond the Query-Response Paradigm , 2009, Exploratory Search: Beyond the Query-Response Paradigm.

[20]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Linking search tasks with low-level eye movement patterns , 2010, ECCE.

[21]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Searching the Web: the public and their queries , 2001 .

[22]  Nicu Sebe,et al.  What Are You Looking at? , 2011, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[23]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Multitasking information seeking and searching processes , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[24]  Karl Gyllstrom,et al.  A comparison of query and term suggestion features for interactive searching , 2009, SIGIR.

[25]  Edward Cutrell,et al.  What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search , 2007, CHI.

[26]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Exploring and predicting search task difficulty , 2012, CIKM '12.

[27]  Jingjing Liu,et al.  Personalizing information retrieval for multi‐session tasks: Examining the roles of task stage, task type, and topic knowledge on the interpretation of dwell time as an indicator of document usefulness , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  Andrei Broder,et al.  A taxonomy of web search , 2002, SIGF.

[29]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  A faceted approach to conceptualizing tasks in information seeking , 2008, Inf. Process. Manag..

[30]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Eye-tracking analysis of user behavior in WWW search , 2004, SIGIR '04.

[31]  Joakim Dahlberg Eye Tracking with Eye Glasses , 2010 .

[32]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Individual differences in gaze patterns for web search , 2010, IIiX.

[33]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface , 1989 .