Towards a Model of Understanding Social Search

transcript

Brynn M. EvansUC San Diego

bmevans@cogsci.ucsd.edu

Ed H. ChiPARC

echi@parc.com

Towards a Model of Understanding Social Search

Photo Credit: David Wild

CSCW 2008 Nov 11, 2008

Photo Credit: Image Source

Search is more than a database query.

Janet’s extended search process

BEFORE

DURING

had partial knowledge, needed specific information

Google

shared information with colleagues

Search can be social.

What is social search?

an umbrella term used to describe search acts that make use of social interactions with others.

social search :

an umbrella term used to describe search acts that make use of social interactions with others.

social search :

Where those interactions may be:• explicit or implicit,

• co-located or remote,

• synchronous or asynchronous.

GLANCE; GOLDBERG; RIEDL; SMYTHTWIDALE; MORRIS

KUHLTHAU; TWIDALE; WILSON

What are we trying to do?

Learn about the role of social interactions in search.

goal :

Analyze 150 responses to a critical-incident survey.

method :(FLANAGAN 1954)

The Survey

27-question critical-incident questionnaireon people’s most recent search experience.

Mechanical Turk -- micro-task market(KITTUR, CHI & SUH, 2008)

The SurveyWe sought the context and purpose of the search experience.

BEFORE

DURING

BEFORE

DURING

• when did the episode occur?• what were you doing before the search?• did you talk with anyone prior to searching?

BEFORE

DURING

• what steps did you take in your search?• did you interact with anyone?

BEFORE

DURING

AFTER • what did you do immediately after?• did you share your results with anyone?

• what steps did you take in your search?• did you interact with anyone?

Subject Sample• N = 150• Anonymous, English-speaking users• diverse backgrounds

9% Education9% Financial 7% Healthcare6% Govt. Agency6% Software6% Retail5% Research

Profession Employer

Universities (London, Illinois, Missouri, Northeastern)Liberty Mutual, Ernst & YoungChartOne Inc, Mid State Health Systems IRS, US Army, Navy, Air Force, Dept of CommerceOracle, EA GamesTarget, Circuit CityLexisNexis, GE Plastics

Profession Employer

Model of Search

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

ch externally-motivated searchers

framing the context

refining the

requirementsFORMULATE REPRESENTATION

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

self-motivated searchers

navigational informational

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

search product /end product

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

externally-motivated searchers

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

specific request from a boss, customer, or client

Photo Credit: tuexperto_com5

self-initiated search for personal or work related information

Photo Source: Peter Voerman

Before Search

31% 69%

search preparation

framing the context

externally-motivated

usersself-motivated

FORMULATE REPRESENTATION

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

Before Search

31% 69%

framing the context

refining the requirements

usersself-motivated

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

Before Search

31% 69%

framing the context

usersself-motivated

users43%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

Before Search

31% 69%

framing the context

usersself-motivated

70% 30% SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

users43%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

Before Searchexternally-motivated

usersframing

the context

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

self-motivated users

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

43% users

30%70%

REASONS FOR

SOCIAL

usersframing

the context

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

43% users

30%70%

1. establish guidelines

externally-motivated REASONS

SOCIAL

usersframing

the context

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

43% users

30%70%

1. establish guidelines

1. establish guidelines2. seek advice3. brainstorm4. collect search tips (e.g., keywords, URLs)

self-motivatedREASONS

SOCIAL

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

During Search

3 types of information needs (BRODER 2002)

During Search

3 types of information needs

28%navigational

step A

step B

Photo Credit: Library of Congress via pingnews

(BRODER 2002)

During Search

13%transactional

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

28%navigational

step A

step B

Photo Credit: Jeremy GoldmanPhoto Credit: Library of Congress via pingnews

(BRODER 2002)

59%informational

FORAGINGsearch

process

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

During Search

Photo Credit: Children at Risk Foundation

informational

FORAGINGsearch

process

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

During Search

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

Photo Credit: Children at Risk Foundation

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

After Search

search product / end product

After Search

DO NOTHING

After Search

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

After Search

ORGANIZE

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

After Search

ORGANIZE

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users

After Search

ORGANIZE

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

After Search

ORGANIZE

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

to publicothers

2%2 users

to proximateothers

87%86 users

After Search

ORGANIZE

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

to self 15%15 users

to publicothers

2%2 users

to proximateothers

87%86 users

After Search

ORGANIZE

DO NOTHING

TAKE ACTION

59% of all users shared information with others

to self 15%15 users

to publicothers

2%2 users

to proximateothers

87%86 users

After Search

1. obligation

1. obligation2. thought others would be interested3. to get feedback

self-motivatedREASONS FOR

SHARING

59% of all users shared information with others

to self 15%15 users

to publicothers

2%2 users

to proximateothers

87%86 users

Limitations

What does it mean to be an active social searcher?What considerations go into seeking help from social networks?

Is social search more useful for certain types of info?Procedural knowledge? Experience-based knowledge?

How is the experience different for search failures?Will we see more cases of social outreach during failed searches? Will searchers exploit all options before admitting failure?

Conclusion

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.B

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

reasons for interacting: to get advice, guidelines, feedback, or search tips

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

3 types of search: informational search provides a compelling case for social search support.

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.

59% users engaged in post-search sharing.

“evidence file”

SENSEMAKING

process

searchFORAGING

framing the context

refining the

GATHER REQUIREMENTS

13% 59%28%

transactional

step A

step B

TRANSACTION

step A

step B

DO NOTHING

ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE

TAKE ACTION

28% 72%

SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

to publicothers

to proximateothers

to self 15% 87% 2%

43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.

59% users engaged in post-search sharing.

reasons for interacting: thought others might be interested, to get feedback, out of obligation

Design Principles

• instant messaging (IM) access to friends near the search box

access resources during preparationBefore Search, users need:

Photo Credit: Jeff Hester

• related keywords or search trails

• tag clouds from domain experts

help evaluating & validating resultsDuring Search, users need:

Similar to: GLANCE; SMYTH

Photo Credit: Rooney John

MR. TAGGY

• sharing tools built-in to the site or search page

facilities for sharing search findingsAfter Search, users need: SPARTAG.US (PARC)

MR. TAGGY

Photo Credit: Image Source

Thank You!

Ed H. Chi

echi@parc.comhttp://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~echi/

Brynn M. Evans

bmevans@gmail.comhttp://brynnevans.com

Towards a Model of Understanding Social Search

Technology