research-article
Authors: Ben Wang, Jiqun Liu
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Volume 75, Issue 9
Pages 937 - 956
Published: 17 June 2024 Publication History
Metrics
Total Citations0Total Downloads0Last 12 Months0
Last 6 weeks0
New Citation Alert added!
This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:
You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.
To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.
Manage my Alerts
New Citation Alert!
Please log in to your account
- View Options
- References
- Media
- Tables
- Share
Abstract
Understanding the roles of search gain and cost in users' search decision‐making is a key topic in interactive information retrieval (IIR). While previous research has developed user models based on simulated gains and costs, it is unclear how users' actual perceptions of search gains and costs form and change during search interactions. To address this gap, our study adopted expectation‐confirmation theory (ECT) to investigate users' perceptions of gains and costs. We re‐analyzed data from our previous study, examining how contextual and search features affect users' perceptions and how their expectation‐confirmation states impact their following searches. Our findings include: (1) The point where users' actual dwell time meets their constant expectation may serve as a reference point in evaluating perceived gain and cost; (2) these perceptions are associated with in situ experience represented by usefulness labels, browsing behaviors, and queries; (3) users' current confirmation states affect their perceptions of Web page usefulness in the subsequent query. Our findings demonstrate possible effects of expectation‐confirmation, prospect theory, and information foraging theory, highlighting the complex relationships among gain/cost, expectations, and dwell time at the query level, and the reference‐dependent expectation at the session level. These insights enrich user modeling and evaluation in human‐centered IR.
References
[1]
Abdi, H., & Williams, L. J. (2010). Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) test. Encyclopedia of Research Design, 3(1), 1–5.
[2]
Abeler, J., Falk, A., Goette, L., & Huffman, D. (2011). Reference points and effort provision. American Economic Review, 101(2), 470–492.
[3]
Al‐Maskari, A., & Sanderson, M. (2010). A review of factors influencing user satisfaction in information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(5), 859–868.
Digital Library
[4]
Azzopardi, L. (2011). The economics in interactive information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 15–24). ACM.
Digital Library
[5]
Azzopardi, L. (2014). Modelling interaction with economic models of search. In Proceedings of the 37th international ACM SIGIR conference on research & development in information retrieval (pp. 3–12). ACM.
Digital Library
[6]
Azzopardi, L. (2021). Cognitive biases in search: A review and reflection of cognitive biases in information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 2021 conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 27–37). ACM.
Digital Library
[7]
Azzopardi, L., Kelly, D., & Brennan, K. (2013). How query cost affects search behavior. In Proceedings of the 36th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 23–32). ACM.
Digital Library
[8]
Azzopardi, L., Thomas, P., & Craswell, N. (2018). Measuring the utility of search engine result pages: An information foraging based measure. In The 41st international ACM SIGIR conference on research & development in information retrieval (pp. 605–614). ACM.
[9]
Azzopardi, L., & Zuccon, G. (2016). An analysis of the cost and benefit of search interactions. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM international conference on the theory of information retrieval (pp. 59–68). ACM.
Digital Library
[10]
Azzopardi, L., & Zuccon, G. (2019). Building economic models of human computer interaction. In Extended abstracts of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–4). ACM.
Digital Library
[11]
Backus, M., Blake, T., Masterov, D., & Tadelis, S. (2022). Expectation, disappointment, and exit: Evidence on reference point formation from an online marketplace. Journal of the European Economic Association, 20(1), 116–149.
[12]
Bates, M. J. (1989). The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface. Online Review, 13(5), 407–424.
[13]
Berget, G., & MacFarlane, A. (2020). What is known about the impact of impairments on information seeking and searching? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 71(5), 596–611.
Digital Library
[14]
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation‐confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 325, 351–370.
[15]
Cancho, R. F. I., & Solé, R. V. (2003). Least effort and the origins of scaling in human language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(3), 788–791.
[16]
Chapelle, O., Metlzer, D., Zhang, Y., & Grinspan, P. (2009). Expected reciprocal rank for graded relevance. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 621–630). ACM.
Digital Library
[17]
Chen, N., Liu, J., & Sakai, T. (2023). A reference‐dependent model for web search evaluation: Understanding and measuring the experience of boundedly rational users. In Proceedings of the ACM web conference 2023 (pp. 3396–3405). ACM.
[18]
Chen, N., Zhang, F., & Sakai, T. (2022). Constructing better evaluation metrics by incorporating the anchoring effect into the user model. In Proceedings of the 45th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval. ACM.
Digital Library
[19]
Chen, S.‐C., Yen, D. C., & Hwang, M. I. (2012). Factors influencing the continuance intention to the usage of web 2.0: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 933–941.
Digital Library
[20]
Cole, M. J., Hendahewa, C., Belkin, N. J., & Shah, C. (2015). User activity patterns during information search. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 33(1), 1–39.
Digital Library
[21]
Dupret, G. (2011). Discounted cumulative gain and user decision models. In International symposium on string processing and information retrieval (pp. 2–13). Spire.
[22]
Ferguson, C. J. (2016). An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(5), 532–538.
[23]
Fidel, R. (2012). Human information interaction: An ecological approach to information behavior. Mit Press.
[24]
Franque, F. B., Oliveira, T., Tam, C., & de Oliveira Santini, F. (2020). A meta‐analysis of the quantitative studies in continuance intention to use an information system. Internet Research, 31, 123–158.
[25]
Gomroki, G., Behzadi, H., Fattahi, R., & Salehi Fadardi, J. (2021). Identifying effective cognitive biases in information retrieval. Journal of Information Science, 49, 348–358.
[26]
Hossain, M. A., & Quaddus, M. (2012). Expectation–confirmation theory in information system research: A review and analysis. In Information systems theory (pp. 441–469). Springer.
[27]
Huang, Y.‐M. (2019). Examining students' continued use of desktop services: Perspectives from expectation‐confirmation and social influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 23–31.
Digital Library
[28]
Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.
[29]
Kelly, D., Arguello, J., Edwards, A., & Wu, W.‐C. (2015). Development and evaluation of search tasks for iir experiments using a cognitive complexity framework. In Proceedings of the 2015 international conference on the theory of information retrieval (pp. 101–110). ACM.
Digital Library
[30]
Li, Y. (2009). Exploring the relationships between work task and search task in information search. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 275–291.
Digital Library
[31]
Li, Y., & Belkin, N. J. (2008). A faceted approach to conceptualizing tasks in information seeking. Information Processing & Management, 44(6), 1822–1837.
Digital Library
[32]
Lipani, A., Carterette, B., & Yilmaz, E. (2019). From a user model for query sessions to session rank biased precision (SRBP). In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGIR international conference on theory of information retrieval (pp. 109–116). ACM.
Digital Library
[33]
Liu, C., Liu, Y.‐H., Liu, J., & Bierig, R. (2021). Search interface design and evaluation. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, 15(3–4), 243–416.
Digital Library
[34]
Liu, J. (2023). A behavioral economics approach to interactive information retrieval: Understanding and supporting boundedly rational users (Vol. 48). Springer Nature.
[35]
Liu, J., Cole, M. J., Liu, C., Bierig, R., Gwizdka, J., Belkin, N. J., Zhang, J., & Zhang, X. (2010). Search behaviors in different task types. In Proceedings of the 10th annual joint conference on digital libraries (pp. 69–78). ACM.
Digital Library
[36]
Liu, J., & Han, F. (2020). Investigating reference dependence effects on user search interaction and satisfaction: A behavioral economics perspective. In Proceedings of the 43rd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 1141–1150). ACM.
Digital Library
[37]
Liu, J., Mitsui, M., Belkin, N. J., & Shah, C. (2019). Task, information seeking intentions, and user behavior: Toward a multilevel understanding of Web search. In Proceedings of the 2019 conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 123–132). ACM.
Digital Library
[38]
Liu, J., Sarkar, S., & Shah, C. (2020). Identifying and predicting the states of complex search tasks. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 193–202). ACM.
Digital Library
[39]
Liu, J., & Shah, C. (2019). Investigating the impacts of expectation disconfirmation on web search. In Proceedings of the 2019 conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 319–323). ACM.
Digital Library
[40]
Liu, Y.‐H., Thomas, P., Gedeon, T., & Rusnachenko, N. (2022). Search interfaces for biomedical searching: How do gaze, user perception, search behaviour and search performance relate? In Proceedings of the 2022 conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 78–89). ACM.
[41]
Luo, C., Liu, Y., Sakai, T., Zhou, K., Zhang, F., Li, X., & Ma, S. (2017). Does document relevance affect the searcher's perception of time? In Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining (pp. 141–150). ACM.
Digital Library
[42]
Mao, J., Liu, Y., Zhou, K., Nie, J.‐Y., Song, J., Zhang, M., … Luo, H. (2016). When does relevance mean usefulness and user satisfaction in web search? In Proceedings of the 39th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 463–472). ACM.
Digital Library
[43]
Marchionini, G. (1995). Information seeking in electronic environments. Cambridge University Press.
[44]
Maruping, L. M., Bala, H., Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2017). Going beyond intention: Integrating behavioral expectation into the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(3), 623–637.
[45]
Maxwell, D., Azzopardi, L., Järvelin, K., & Keskustalo, H. (2015). Searching and stopping: An analysis of stopping rules and strategies. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM CIKM (pp. 313–322). ACM.
[46]
McDuff, D., Thomas, P., Craswell, N., Rowan, K., & Czerwinski, M. (2021). Do affective cues validate behavioural metrics for search? In Proceedings of the 44th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 1544–1553). ACM.
Digital Library
[47]
McGregor, M., Azzopardi, L., & Halvey, M. (2021). Untangling cost, effort, and load in information seeking and retrieval. In Proceedings of the 2021 conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 151–161). ACM.
Digital Library
[48]
Moffat, A., Bailey, P., Scholer, F., & Thomas, P. (2017). Incorporating user expectations and behavior into the measurement of search effectiveness. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 35(3), 1–38.
Digital Library
[49]
Moffat, A., Mackenzie, J., Thomas, P., & Azzopardi, L. (2022). A flexible framework for offline effectiveness metrics. In Proceedings of the 45th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 578–587). ACM.
Digital Library
[50]
Moffat, A., Thomas, P., & Scholer, F. (2013). Users versus models: What observation tells us about effectiveness metrics. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on information & knowledge management (pp. 659–668). ACM.
[51]
Moffat, A., & Zobel, J. (2008). Rank‐biased precision for measurement of retrieval effectiveness. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 27(1), 1–27.
Digital Library
[52]
Najaftorkaman, M., Ghapanchi, A. H., Talaei‐Khoei, A., & Ray, P. (2015). A taxonomy of antecedents to user adoption of health information systems: A synthesis of thirty years of research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(3), 576–598.
Digital Library
[53]
Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (1999). Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4), 643–675.
[54]
Piwowarski, B., Dupret, G., & Lalmas, M. (2012). Beyond cumulated gain and average precision: Including willingness and expectation in the user model (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, LIP6 UMR 7606.
[55]
Pogacar, F. A., Ghenai, A., Smucker, M. D., & Clarke, C. L. (2017). The positive and negative influence of search results on people's decisions about the efficacy of medical treatments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR international conference on theory of information retrieval (pp. 209–216). ACM.
Digital Library
[56]
Qazi, A., Tamjidyamcholo, A., Raj, R. G., Hardaker, G., & Standing, C. (2017). Assessing consumers' satisfaction and expectations through online opinions: Expectation and disconfirmation approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 450–460.
Digital Library
[57]
Scholer, F., Kelly, D., Wu, W.‐C., Lee, H. S., & Webber, W. (2013). The effect of threshold priming and need for cognition on relevance calibration and assessment. In Proceedings of the 36th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 623–632). ACM.
Digital Library
[58]
Shokouhi, M., White, R., & Yilmaz, E. (2015). Anchoring and adjustment in relevance estimation. In Proceedings of the 38th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 963–966). ACM.
Digital Library
[59]
Simon, H. A. (2000). Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow. Mind & Society, 1(1), 25–39.
[60]
Steelman, Z. R., & Soror, A. A. (2017). Why do you keep doing that? The biasing effects of mental states on it continued usage intentions. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 209–223.
Digital Library
[61]
Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Kuang, D. (2002). Quick and easy implementation of the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure for controlling the false positive rate in multiple comparisons. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27(1), 77–83.
[62]
Thomas, P., Kazai, G., White, R., & Craswell, N. (2022). The crowd is made of people: Observations from large‐scale crowd labelling. In ACM SIGIR conference on human information interaction and retrieval (pp. 25–35). ACM.
[63]
Thomas, P., Moffat, A., Bailey, P., & Scholer, F. (2014). Modeling decision points in user search behavior. In Proceedings of the 5th information interaction in context symposium (pp. 239–242). ACM.
Digital Library
[64]
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference‐dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039–1061.
[65]
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 297–323.
[66]
Verma, M., & Yilmaz, E. (2017). Search costs vs. user satisfaction on mobile. In European conference on information retrieval (pp. 698–704). University of Glasgow.
[67]
Wang, B., & Liu, J. (2022). Investigating the relationship between in‐situ user expectations and web search behavior. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 827–829.
[68]
Wang, B., & Liu, J. (2023). Investigating the role of in‐situ user expectations in web search. Information Processing & Management, 60(3), 103300.
Digital Library
[69]
Wittek, P., Liu, Y.‐H., Darányi, S., Gedeon, T., & Lim, I. S. (2016). Risk and ambiguity in information seeking: Eye gaze patterns reveal contextual behavior in dealing with uncertainty. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1790.
[70]
Wu, M., Turpin, A., Thom, J. A., Scholer, F., & Wilkinson, R. (2014). Cost and benefit estimation of experts' mediation in an enterprise search. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(1), 146–163.
Digital Library
[71]
Zhang, F., Liu, Y., Li, X., Zhang, M., Xu, Y., & Ma, S. (2017). Evaluating web search with a bejeweled player model. In Proceedings of the 40th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 425–434). ACM.
Digital Library
[72]
Zhang, F., Liu, Y., Mao, J., Zhang, M., & Ma, S. (2020). User behavior modeling for web search evaluation. AI Open, 1, 40–56.
[73]
Zhang, F., Mao, J., Liu, Y., Xie, X., Ma, W., Zhang, M., & Ma, S. (2020). Models versus satisfaction: Towards a better understanding of evaluation metrics. In Proceedings of the 43rd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 379–388). ACM.
[74]
Zhang, Y. (2014). Beyond quality and accessibility: Source selection in consumer health information searching. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(5), 911–927.
Digital Library
Recommendations
- Analyzing Knowledge Gain of Users in Informational Search Sessions on the Web
CHIIR '18: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Human Information Interaction & Retrieval
Web search is frequently used by people to acquire new knowledge and to satisfy learning-related objectives, but little is known about how a user»s knowledge evolves through the course of a search session. We present a study addressing the knowledge ...
Read More
- Understanding determinants of information systems users’ behaviour: a comparison of two models in the context of integrated accounting and budgeting software
This study examines determinants that affect the behaviour of information systems IS users, and influence of the users’ decisions to continue using IS by two models: the technology acceptance model TAM and the expectation-confirmation model of IS ...
Read More
- Understanding Chinese users' switching behaviour of cloud storage services
PurposeThis paper aims to explore the switching intention and behaviour of cloud storage services CSS individual users in China by integrating the variables of switching cost and habit into the expectation disconfirmation theory.Design/methodology/...
Read More
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology Volume 75, Issue 9
September 2024
87 pages
ISSN:2330-1635
EISSN:2330-1643
DOI:10.1002/asi.v75.9
Issue’s Table of Contents
© 2024 Association for Information Science and Technology.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
United States
Publication History
Published: 17 June 2024
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
View Article Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
Total Citations
Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 06 Aug 2024
Other Metrics
View Author Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in
Full Access
Get this Publication
Media
Figures
Other
Tables