The Psychology of Search: Chapter One
Introduction
Search is a killer application on the web and in the enterprise. Perhaps it is the killer app. Therefore, by definition and practice, it is a success story. At the same time, however, no one has explained search. That is, no one has explained the fundamental nature of search. Where is the psychology behind search? And quite seriously I ask, What is search?
The primary driver of change in the universe of search has been the trial and error of applications and features. “Throw it against the wall and see if it sticks.” Similarly, an emphasis of search has been on the technology, such as algorithms, relevancy, link popularity, and facets. To virtually all people, with perhaps the exception of search engine companies and search engine optimizers (SEOs), these aspects of search are irrelevant and useless.
You don’t care much about the technology of search. You care about results.
But the conversation of search is deeper than the results. Searching is not “search” itself. Search is merely a means to an end. The crux of search is finding information, getting answers, and completing tasks. This is obvious, but that is exactly why it should be stated. The billion dollar question is, Why do search results matter?
Search is actually a last resort. If you knew the answers, you wouldn’t need to search. When people are forced to search they are indicating that they are feeling the pain of not having what they want. Search is the ever-dying-but-never-quite-dead canary in the vast mine of internet chaos.
Search is an indication of failure, not success. (Again, if you had the answers, you wouldn’t need to search.)
In light of these true drivers, search needs a realistic and practical examination. But, it doesn’t need an examination from the technology point of view. You can get that for $5.00 on any street corner. Instead, the examination is needed from the point of view of humanity. Real people, with real questions, facing real problems, and with real needs. In short, there is a need for psychology of search.
What does psychology tells us about search? Some of the answers you’ve been looking for are going to follow in the next several days. Buckle up.
(Throw me a book contract and I’ll really write something really jazzy. Wink, wink.)
August 25th, 2005 at 8:00 am
[…] The Psychology of Search: Chapter One […]
August 26th, 2005 at 3:53 pm
[…] The Psychology of Search: Chapter One […]
August 27th, 2005 at 11:44 am
Are you familiar with the information scent work by Pirolli, et al. ? They explain search very intensely.
August 28th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
Psychology of Search, Harvesting and Purposeful Search
John S. Rhode’s Webword site has just published an interesting three-part series on the Psychology of Search. It may be found, with sample extracts, at:
The Psychology of Search: Chapter 1
You don’t care much about the technol…
August 28th, 2005 at 2:52 pm
Andy,
Are you talking about this, for example:
http://www2.parc.com/istl/members/pirolli/pirolli_files/NewScientist_pirolli.html
Well, I definitely *like* Pirolli’s material, but it is far more rooted in sociology than psychology. It is more about looking at web searching in light of group behaviors, or tribes. How do people search, not how does a person search. I’m currently more interested in how individuals search, and why they search. I think there is a difference in mood and tone, if nothing else.
August 29th, 2005 at 11:36 am
John,
You state, “Search is actually a last resort. If you knew the answers, you wouldn’t need to search.” Is this always the case?
I know that Google is exceptional at certain types of searches, product web sites for example. In this case, I use Google as my first resort. I don’t even attempt to remember the web site for the product, remembering that I can type up the query again in Google to get the result, even to the extent of using the “Feeling Lucky” button.
So, in some cases, search is a primary navigation aid.
August 29th, 2005 at 12:19 pm
Daniel,
You make some great points. I don’t think it is always true that search is a last resort or that it is always an indication of failure. For example, in terms of navigation, I think you are correct. I often use the Google Toolbar to do simple navigation versus my Favorites or other tools. Also, there are certainly times where people search just to kind of poke around the web. However, I would argue that these are exceptions to the rule.
The difference we are discussing is that you use the functionality of search to do things that aren’t neceearily related to “search” as an activity. Stated more simply, you might use the Google Toolbar to find what you want because it is easier but not because you are truly searching.
That is definitely a valid point. However, it doesn’t strike against my central point that search for “searching” is often a last resolt to many other possibilities. At least, I don’t feel that it does.
To your point, again, search is definitely useful as a navigational aid. Search might even be more important to “navigation” than navigational mechanisms such as Favorites, browser functionality, web site navgation bars, and so forth.
(Surprising that search, as a set of tools, is so powerful. Many people lump all things even somewhat related to search into a search bucket. That’s generally good for companies like Google but it is bad for folks that are trying to thinking freely about “search” as it applies to humans. Google isn’t the stopping point for all human searching.)
August 30th, 2005 at 3:39 pm
Daniel,
I have to concur with John; I do not think of search as a “last resort.” Many users I talk to will use search instead of bookmark for fairly specific topics. For example, if they know that they can throw a couple of words (say baltimore real estate) and the hit they want is in the top 5 they will simply type in the words.
I also wonder, are you including browsing directories in your definition of search. From my perspective — if you are this is a very good instance of a tool that is excellent for a beginning. Browse is excellent for seredipitous finds. In addition, I often throw a term into Wikipedia to see what other terms are highlighted in the article — I find myself obtaining incidental learning in this manner.
I don’t think that many people see search as a “failure” anymore than they see the need to use an autodial to dial their friends and family.
I *do* find the psychology of search facinating. There are some studies in the world of HCI in this area. The user’s focus will affect their seeking behavior — and their seeking behavior affects their focus.
Great thoughts!
August 30th, 2005 at 3:46 pm
sociology v. psychology:
John you mention:
How do people search, not how does a person search. I’m currently more interested in how individuals search, and why they search. I think there is a difference in mood and tone, if nothing else.
What a great point! I think that a lot of HCI winds up falling into the sociological realms, since the stats are aggregated in sociological terms. The article you linked to regarding asian/euro-american visual perspeptual differences is a good example of a sociological approach. I remember when I took an honors Pschology/Sociology course our co-professors would argue from the different perspectives. I never did see them as truly opposed since individuals affect society and vice versa. But the tone is very different and the focus is far more specific.
I don’t think I’ve seen a lot of studies along this vein. I have seen developmental/educational studies that would qualilfy. However that is probably more limited than you want to see.
I have seen some studies of how the searcher’s affect affects their searching style & effectiveness.
August 6th, 2008 at 4:25 am
Later, I played my small number, and I bought a little ragnarok online zeny to arm my number. In this time, I knew a lot of friends. That summer is the happiest time I had in RO. RO let me know in the game it also have friendship. RO let me have a lot things, I will never leave. I love RO.
August 6th, 2008 at 4:52 am
Higher Vocational does not necessarily need to“transfer”of a single approach ，Players can also change under different conditions to the fighting style, and generally quite different RPG.of course, Props to the charges, so you must be prepared NosTale money.
August 7th, 2008 at 3:36 am
Even this pathetic pharmaceutical division, produced the drug have to give, make a paste of money, I would like to be a soldier diverted！As I will get more mabinogi gold and mabinogi money.
August 25th, 2008 at 4:40 am
He often took me to train operation, and bought Ragnarok Online zeny, we could thought, he was often scolded pigs, when he said that, I would say: “I am the pig, why do you find a pig as your wife”, he ran here and said: “I like the pig”.
August 25th, 2008 at 4:44 am
You said, you did not play Rupees very often, in fact we had the same support to the present, simply because the people and events around.
August 25th, 2008 at 4:49 am
It was not seriously the end, no special met the same, and finally in the event of a legend inside the mature 30-year-old man to his gave me equipment and a lot of Rohan Online crone, I felt he was very kindly.
September 27th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
thank’s