Search engine query generation for effective retrieval of known academic publications.

Weideman, M.

Proceedings of the 12th World Wide Web conference (ZAW3-10). 21-23 September. Durban, South Africa.

Weideman, M. 2010. Search engine query generation for effective retrieval of known academic publications. Proceedings of the 12th World Wide Web conference (ZAW3-10). 21-23 September. Durban, South Africa. Online: http://web-visibility.co.za/website-visibility-digital-library-seo/

ABSTRACT
Academics often need access to publications of other academic work for reference. Sometimes however, some detail of a specific reference is known, but a copy of the full document is required. The objective of this research project was to compare different methods of query generation to successfully retrieve academic documents, while assuming that the user has the basic document details. In a series of empirical experiments, 20 universities with digital libraries (not requiring logins) were identified. Five academic documents stored in each ones' digital library were further found and inspected. Searches were done, using three types of query for each one of these documents. Subsequently, rankings on search engine result pages were recorded. The current visibility of these documents was then calculated. After submission to Google, a waiting period was allowed for crawler visitation, and the searches and calculations repeated. The resultant data was used to measure the success of the three different types of queries over 300 searches. This was done both before and after manually submitting each document's URL to Google. Results indicate that using keywords from the document title produces the most efficient query, with much improvement after submission. Secondly, using a text sequence from the body produces the second-most efficient query, but with a small reduction in visibility. Finally, using author surnames produced a much less efficient query, although with slightly increased visibility. It was concluded that academic searchers should concentrate on using a concatenation of weight-carrying keywords from the title of a known academic document as search query for most efficient document retrieval.
REFERENCES
  1. Ashley, M. 2007. Search - The Killer App in Vista and Office 2007. Available WWW: http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/22148 (accessed 3 August 2010).
  2. Baez, M., Birukou, A., Casati, F., and Marchese, M. 2010. Addressing information overload in the scientific community. IEEE Internet Computing. Available WWW: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIC.2010.107 (accessed 3 August 2010).
  3. Beel, J., Gipp, B. and Wilde, E. 2010. Academic search engine optimization (ASEO). Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41(2):176-190.
  4. Blankenbaker, J. and Mishra, J. 2009. Paid search for online travel agencies: exploring strategies for search keywords. Journal of Revenue & Pricing Management, 8:155-165.
  5. CommerceNet/Nielsen Media. 1997. Search Engines’ Most Popular Method of Surfing the Web. Available WWW: http://www.commerce.net/news/press/0416.html (accessed 5 August 2010).
  6. Jansen, B.J. 2000. The effect of query complexity on Web searching results. Information Research, (6)1. Available WWW: http://InformationR.net/ir/6-1/paper87.html (accessed 15 August 2005).
  7. Marshall, J. 2010. Google loses Search Share to Yahoo, Microsoft in June. Available WWW: http://www.clickz.com/clickz/stats/1724692/google-loses-search-share-yahoo- microsoft-june (accessed 6 August 2010).
  8. Martin, R.A. 2010. Finding free and open access resources: a value-added service for patrons. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 20(3):189-200.
  9. Spink, A. and Xu, J.L. 2000. Selected results from a large study of Web searching: the Excite study. Information Research, (6)1. Available WWW: http://InformationR.net/ir/6- 1/paper87.html (accessed 4 August 2010).
  10. Sullivan, D. 2008. Hitwise: Google Again Hits New High; Microsoft & Yahoo Again New Lows. Available WWW: http://searchengineland.com/080617-173543.php (accessed 2 August 2010).
  11. Thurow, S. 2003. Search engine visibility. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders.
  12. Vinson, J. 2007. Killer Apps in Knowledge Management. Available WWW: http://blog.jackvinson.com/archives/2007/01/17/killer_apps_in_knowledge_ management.html (accessed 3 August 2010).
  13. Voorbij, H.J. 1999. Searching scientific information on the Internet: a Dutch academic user survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(7):598-615.
  14. Weideman, M. 2009. Website visibility: the theory and practice of improving rankings. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
  15. Weideman, M. and Ngindana, M.W. 2004. Website navigation architectures and their effect on website visibility - can search engines deliver on the promise? Proceedings of SAICSIT 2004 Conference: Fulfilling the Promise of ICT, October 2004. Stellenbosch, South Africa:292-296.
  16. Weideman, M. 2001. Internet searching as a study aid for Information Technology and Information Systems learners at a tertiary level. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cape Town, Cape Town.
Full text of Conference Proceedings No 0103: Search engine query generation for effective retrieval of known academic publications.

Digital Library with full-text of academic publications on website visibility, usability, search engines, information retrieval

Back to Home page