Page 1

CITY UNIVERSITY LONDON MSc in Information Systems and Technology Project Report 2013 Title: Google's personal search algorithm and its impact on research.

Filip Lubański Supervised by: Jason Dykes 11th of January 2013

By submitting this work, I declare that this work is entirely my own except those parts duly identified and referenced in my submission. It complies with any specified word limits and the requirements and regulations detailed in the assessment instructions and any other relevant programme and module documentation. In submitting this work I acknowledge that I have read and understood the regulations and code regarding academic misconduct, including that relating to plagiarism, as specified in the Programme Handbook. I also acknowledge that this work will be subject to a variety of checks for academic misconduct

Signed ………………………….


Abstract The personal search was introduced by Google to help find results relevant to the user. This paper explores how Google’s personal search algorithm affects search results across search terms related to the MSC course in Information Systems and Technology. Search terms used in this research have got various levels of complexity and are relevant to the Modules taught at the City University For the purposes of the experiment Google Plus account has been linked with different social connections from different categories. The results were documented and analysed to answer the research question and validate the hypothesis. The hypothesis was that new social connections will cause proportional decrease in the overlapping results.

2


Table of content Abstract…………………………………………………………………...……………………..… 2 Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………..………………3 1. Introduction and Objectives …………………………………………….……..…… 6 1.1.Google’s Personal Search ……………………………….………………………. 6 1.2.Objectives ………………………………………………………………………………. 7 1.3.Hypothesis ……………………………………………………………………………... 7 1.4.Contribution / Beneficiaries ………………………………………………...… 7 1.5.Scope ……………………………………………………………………………………… 8 2. Setbacks and irregularities ………………………………………………………….. 8 3. Literature review ………………………………………………………………………. 14 4. Methods ……………………………………………………………………………………. .16 4.1.Research strategy ………………………………………………………………… 16 4.2.Aim ………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 4.3.Designing experiment ………………………………………………………….. 17 4.3.1. Google Plus personas …..……………………………………………… 18 4.3.2. Categories of Social connections …………………………………. 18 4.3.3. Social connection types ……………………………………………….. 19 4.3.4. Query types …………………………………………………………………. 19 4.3.5. Variables ……………………………………………………..….…………… 19 4.3.6. Controls ……………………………………………………………………….. 20 4.3.7. Abbreviations used during the experiment …………………. 20 4.4.Planning Experiment 1 ………………………………………………………… 21 4.4.1. Technology category …………………………………………………… 21 4.4.2. Non-Technology category ……………………………………...……. 22 4.4.3. Process ………………………………………...……………………………... 22 4.5.Planning Experiment 2 ………………………………………………………… 24 4.5.1. Search terms ………………………………………………………………. 25 3


4.5.2. Process …………………………………..……………………………..……. .26 4.6.Data-gathering …………………………..…………………………………..……. 28 4.6.1. Visual Aids I used for Quantitative data analysis ……..…. 28 4.6.2. Observation and measurement …………………..………..…….. 28 4.7.Analysis ……………………………………………………………………….………. 29 4.7.1. Correlation ………………………………………………………….………. 29 4.7.2. Standard Deviation …………………………………………….……….. 29 4.8.Tools ………………………………………………………………………………….... 29 5. Results ………………………………………………………………………………………. 30 5.1.Experiment 1 results ………………………………………………………….... 30 5.1.1. Datasets in Experiment 1 ……………………………………………. 30 5.1.2. Observation and Analysis for Experiment 1 ………………… 30 5.2.Experiment 2 results …………………………………………………………… 31 5.2.1. Datasets in Experiment 2 ………………………………………….… 31 5.2.2. Observations and conclusions …………………………………….. 31 5.2.3. Analysis of the overlapping ratio for Search terms ……… 32 5.2.4. Overlapping comparison of search results for each Search term in Experiment 2 …………………………………………………..….33 5.2.5. Analysis of the overlapping ratio for Modules …………….. 34 5.2.6. Overlapping comparison of search results for each Module in Experiment 2……………………………………………………………… 35 5.2.7. Average overlapping of search results for each Search term ……………………….…………………………………………………………..…... 36 5.2.8. Average overlapping of search results for each Module …………………………………………………………………………….……….. 37 5.2.9. Average overlapping ratio results between other Batches ..……………………………………………………………………………………… 39 5.2.10.

Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient ..………... 40

6. Discussion, Reflection & Conclusions …………..………………….…………. 41 6.1.Suggestions for further research ……..………………………….……..… 42 6.2.Areas for improvement ……………………………………….……………...… 43 4


References ……………………………………………………………………………..………… 44 Appendix A - Project Proposal …………………………………………….…………… 48 Appendix B - Google Plus social connections for Experiment 1 from Technology category …………………………………………………… 59 Appendix C - Google Plus social connections for Experiment 1 from mixed non-Technology categories ….………….…………………60 Appendix D - Google Plus social connections for Experiment 2 ……….. 61 Appendix E - Personal search results for Experiment 1 …………………… 62 Appendix F - Personal search results for Experiment 2 …………………… 67 Appendix G - Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation ……… 115

5


1. Introduction and Objectives Google is a very popular topic nowadays due to its enormous popularity and is the most popular web browser. Its digital products and tools are very popular and linked with the powerful search engine. In past years we can see rapidly growing popularity of the social networks like Facebook, Twitter where users can network, communicate between each other and personal search behaviour appears to be common. Google personal search is an upgrade to existing Google’s search algorithm. This algorithm includes other users' recommendations and social media content personalised for each user. “Personal Search can help you find pages your friends have created, and it can also help you find links your contacts have shared on Twitter and other sites. If someone you’re connected to has publicly shared a link, we may show that link in your results with a clear annotation.” (Coppel, 2011)

1.1. Google’s Personal Search In 2009 Google first introduced Personal search on www.google.com as an experimental feature. The intention was to help users find more relevant information from friends and the people they know. In June 2011 Google launched new social networking services Google Plus (also written as Google+ or G+) and reached over 65 million registered users in December 2011 and 400 million in September 2012, according to Paul Allen from New Startup. Feature of Google is allowing users to click +1 on interesting links in order to recommend them to public or only to particular circles of friends. Users can also share, add a comment and send it to the right circles on Google Plus. Next time user's friends and contacts search on Google, they will be able to see friend's +1 recommendation. According to comScore Google’s search engine market in US climbed above 65 % in September 2011. Data collected from Google Plus and +1's affect Google search results. The personal search was introduced by Google to help find results relevant to the user. That will include the posts on Google+ accounts that are within user's circle of friends (also called social connections). During the web search regular search results are displayed with option to include the Personal results. In order to get access to all the benefits of Personal search it is required to be signed into Google Account. Google explains on the website “Search, plus Your World “, that personal search allows users to see content from your social connections or related people and pages. Personal results are marked with a icon. At any time it is possible to hide personal results and switch to organic search by clicking on the icon in the top right of your search results page. Google will personalise the search results taking following criteria into account: 1. Google products: Search for publicly and privately shared content visible to you only in Google+, like photos and posts from your friends. 2. Personal search : Appears in Google’s search engine and allows you to discover relevant images and pages shared by people in user's Google+ circles and by suggested connections:  User’s mutual connections with people on Google products such as Gmail.  Interaction user had with others on Google products. 6


   

The links added to user's profile. The connected accounts you've linked on your Google Account (like your Flickr or LinkedIn profiles ) The people who are in user's extended circles. Friends on external sites, when those friends have connected their accounts on their Google+ profiles.

3. Google Web History: customized results based on your past search activity on Google, such as searches you've done or results you've clicked. 4. Profiles in search: When searching for a friend's name, user might see a link to the relevant Google+ profile in the list of autocomplete predictions. With personal results, it's more likely to see your friend John's profile than some John you’ve never met.

1.2. Objectives The aim of this research is to explore how the Google personal search algorithm will impact research. I will analyse the process of personal search of the terms related to the modules taught in the MSc course in Information Systems and Technology at City University. It is a major goal of education to broaden learners’ outlook and perspectives. How can this occur if users are just getting fed the same type of information provided by the algorithm based on the search history and friends' recommendations? The possibility is also that it may narrow the search results of the individual researcher and thus lower the quality of the resources. This research will test if the use of Google, currently the most popular search engine on the web, provides users with a range of ways to search for particular topic and subject. The research aims to address the following question: Does Google’s personal search broaden or narrow learners’ outlook and perspectives?

1.3. Hypothesis My hypothesis is that linking new social connections to the G+ account will have the proportional influence on the number of unique personal search results comparing to Batch 1. New social connections will cause proportional decrease in the overlapping results (which means increase in the new search results). I will conduct systematic Research to explore whether this hypothesis is valid or not. Project outcome will be analysis of the Experiment that allows me to answer the research question. In the conclusion section I will try to find the repeatable pattern and suggest future research related to this topic.

1.4. Contribution / Beneficiaries The students and academics could better understand the process of obtaining search results and possible ways to broaden their resources. It also would help researchers to conduct more efficiently the search for collaborative work and sharing the resources. Users have to understand how these new rules work in order to take advantage of them. 7


Colleges and Universities may feel encouraged to set up official accounts to join social network Google Plus network for students’ and staff benefit. Universities could set up appropriate procedures in place to deal with the plagiarism effectively.

1.5. Scope Google is known for making changes very often to the code of the search engine algorithm. Due to frequent changes in Google's strategy also towards its products’ features, I will focus solely on the user's social connections within Google+ circles. This decision was dictated by the unexpected changes made by Google to the +1 button after I submitted the Proposal and selected the dissertation topic for my Dissertation. Due to this fact I decided to focus on the Social Connections linked to G+ account and its impact on the Personal Search results. Out of all four criteria used to personalize the search results, only user's G+ social connections will be examined. This will hopefully be sufficient area to answer my research question. During the Experiment the Images and Sponsored links in the Personal search results will not be taken into account. The scope of the research will cover Search terms with various level complexities related to the Modules taught during the MSc course in IST at City University.

2. Setbacks and irregularities In this section I would like to discuss various problems during this project that I successfully overcame and how my initial research idea evolved in the process of resolving the issues. In the process of developing my dissertation proposal into the individual project I experienced various setbacks that made me review the initial scope of the research. This was due to changes made in Google's algorithm as well as the irregularities in the presentation of Google search features. All these changes are documented systematically and the scope of the search has been narrowed accordingly to meet objective of the dissertation and aim of this research. The process of evolving the project from the proposal to current stage was a result of enormous learning process how the Google's system operate, especially in light of currently fast-changing and competing personal search field. My original concept of researching the impact of the Personal search was reduced in scope to the Personal Search base on the Google Plus social connections only. The reason for that were changes in Google's functionalities which are described in details below.

+1 button replaced with the Share link in Google search results My initial idea was to research more about the Google’s +1 button and its impact on the personal search results. At the time of writing my proposal +1 button was available in the list of all search results for given query. This was compared often to the “Like” button in rival company Facebook. Google came up with the +1 button only one year after Facebook introduced its “Like” button. Users could +1 the organic search results as well as the sponsored results. The +1 showed which friends recommended particular search result and was published to user’s social network. The +1 could be undone at any time. The logic behind displaying +1 button in the search results was to allow user to see immediately if particular link was 8


recommended by someone from the circle of friends. The +1 feature also contributes to the Google social search. The +1 button was also available for the non-Google websites, but my area of interest was the list of Google’s search results for my research. At the end of July 2012, Google's Product Manager Sean Liu on behalf of Google announced that experimental change will replace the +1 button with new Share link in Google search. Users could not anymore simply +1 the link in the organic results but only share in Google+ social network with circle of friends of publicly (Liu, 2012). Google search results can be no longer +1 but can be Shared. This will create the post added to user's Google+ stream. This change was not very well received by many users who wished only to +1 certain links without mandatory sharing them in their profile. Google was accused for desperately trying to follow Facebook's example in order to share personally more content on Google+. More shared content means for the company more user engagement and time spend on Google+, by making comments and browsing through other G+ profile pages. The outcome of it can be unpredictable, including loosing users who are dissatisfied by enforcing them into active share rather than passive and more discreet +1 button. Currently users are allowed to +1 only sponsored results (those at the top of the list with light orange background) as shown on the shown on screenshot below.

In the Organic search results the +1 button is not available anymore and replaced with the “Share” link:

9


According to American Customer Satisfaction Index (AACSI), in 2012 Google is number one Social Media platform leading in Customer Satisfaction rank. This situation may change quickly due to fact that Google tried to gain higher position in the social media field and it pushes users to share social content. Facebook is at the bottom of the AACSI mainly for frequent changes to the website's layout and constant changes. It is dictated by Facebook's business objectives rather than user experience in mind. It seems that Google follows Facebook example and next year may not be ranked as a leader in the AACSI anymore.

Personal results section randomly disappears from Search Settings Another very significant setback I experienced was random disappearance of the Personal results section in the Google Search Settings. This is particularly frustrating, as the data analysis depends on this feature being switched on. I experimented on multiple Computers, using various Google Accounts and web browsers, including their own product Google Chrome. The Personal results feature can be accessed through the settings: Options >> Search Settings >> Search Results >> Personal Results To capture inconsistency of the system, at the bottom of this document I include the screenshots. They have been taken for scenario where following conditions are met:   

The same user is logged into the Google Account new tab is opened in the same window newly opened tab does not have Personal result section available in settings

On the screenshot below the Personal search button is available in the Search engine (works as intended)

10


On this screenshot you can see that the Personal search button is not available in the Search engine without any particular reason (system's malfunction). The layout of the web site also changes.

This screenshot shows the Search setting panel where the Personal search feature is switched on (works as intended)

11


On this screenshot you can see that the Personal search feature is not available in the Search setting panel without any reason (system's malfunction)

Solution In order to find a solution to this frustrating problem I reviewed number of forums and Google blogs. I investigated that SSL-encrypted search resolves the issue with Personal Search section in settings as well as the disappearing Personal Search button. The encrypted web search is available on https://encrypted.google.com/. Google began offering this type of search in May 2010 which encrypts both searches and results. Google’s Product manager Evelyn Kao said they “recognize the growing importance of protecting the personalized search results” and adopted stronger encryption SSL protocol (Kao, 2011). Despite this research this is a good practice to use the encrypted search for personalised search. Especially when more users are accessing Google search from unsecured Wi-Fi connections, such as mobile hotspots at Starbucks and other cafes with Internet access (Boulton, 2012). I managed to overcome this issue, access the Personal Search settings and continue my research.

12


Personal results are inaccurate Once user have the search results listed in the Google search engine, it is possible to switch between displaying both types of results:  

All results by clicking the globe icon Personal results by clicking the person icon

By running a simple test I noticed inaccuracy in displayed number of Personal results. Some keywords (e.g. UX) do not show any Personal results at all.

Solution However once I selected a Personal option from: Search Tools button >> All results drop down menu >> Personal The list with all Personal results and the person icons will appear.

13


3. Literature review Google Plus is fairly new service launched only last year, but already powerful core for the Google personal search nowadays. During my research I noticed there are not many academic papers and professional journals related to my research question. Instead there's a lot of online literature in blogs and articles. This is an opportunity and a challenge to conduct academic research in this area and fill in the gap. I reviewed number of articles and books related to the topic. Below I would like to present selected views on the question how Google personal search algorithm impacts researchers. Yohann Coppel, Software Engineer, writes in Social Web Blog about Google's global aspirations. Google's Personal search was invented to help find more relevant information based on recommendations from people you know. It is continuous process to connect more people and peers with more relevant web results delivered to users globally. Google's goal is to get you the most relevant results as quickly as possible. But relevance is about relationships as well as words on webpages. “That’s why we recently started to include more information from people you know, information they’ve shared on Twitter, Flickr and other sites, in Google search results.” (Spiro, 2011) Google enabled to share recommendations with the world right in Google’s search results through +1 feature. The advantage of +1’s is the relevance. You get the right recommendations from people you know when you are looking for information about the topic: “Say, for example, you’re planning a winter trip to Tahoe, Calif. When you do a search, you may now see a +1 from your slalom-skiing aunt next to the result for a lodge in the area. Or if you’re looking for a new pasta recipe, we’ll show you +1’s from your culinary genius college roommate” (Spiro, 2011). This search strategy can be easily applied to group of student in the same course to help each other to identify useful resources recommended by other student fellows they know. This would encourage the collaborative work among them, but also could be potentially encourage plagiarism. Last year Google took one step further, rolling out new social network Google Plus. Om Malik explains in his article that “Today, search is not just about pages, but also about people and the relevance of information to them”. Google brings Personal search to more users globally the ever before. “As tracked by comScore and noted by Search Engine Land, this one month timeline for 25 million users means that Google has reached that benchmark 20 times faster than any other social site.” (Rob D Young, 2011) Now Google personal search engine empowered with the Google Plus data about user's preferences can provide more precise search results in line with users' online activities. “Gaining access to the data users generate when they post status updates, share photos and comment on friends’ activities” (Ingram, 2011). Google has decided to add only public posts from Google Plus to its personal search results. “Personal search has been adding annotations to search results when content from your social connections was shared on services such as Twitter, LinkedIn and others.” (McGee, 2011). The private statuses will remain visible only to selected social circles and Melanie Pinola from PCWorld is enthusiastic about this strategy: “The move is another sign that our social networking statuses are seeping into all other areas of the web. And, the feature is actually pretty useful if you’re looking for relevant results”. (Pinola, 2011) Patrick Powers thinks that Google Plus will work for higher education. Apart from many useful features including collaborative work he praises the robust research: "Both Facebook and Google+ encourage users to enter information about where they went to school. The difference is that this information is public and searchable inside Google+. Basically, this means 14


one could search for XYX university and find scores of people identifying themselves as alumni. Without “friending” every fan out there, this information is difficult to track through Facebook." (Powers, 2011) There are also voices of criticism from former Google's employee that behind the powerful search algorithms, the social aspect of the users should be considered. Paul Adams questions that Google cannot really understand social networks if it only sees them as sources of information for its search algorithms: "Google is an engineering company, and as a researcher or designer, it’s very difficult to have your voice heard at a strategic level. Ultimately I felt that although my research formed a cornerstone of the Google social strategy, and I had correctly predicted how other products in the market would play out, I wasn’t being listened to when it came to executing that strategy. My peers listened intently, but persuading the leadership was a losing battle. Google values technology, not social science". (Adams, 2011) Contrary to views on the helpful aspects of Google personal search features, Eli Pariser explains in his book “The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You” how Google began customizing its search results for each user: “Google's change in policy is symptomatic of the most significant shift to take place on the Web in recent years-the rise of personalization (…) Pariser uncovers how this growing trend threatens to control how we consume and share information as a society-and reveals what we can do about it “. (Pariser, 2011) The Google algorithm personalises our search results with invisible filters, up to the point that we are not be able to search the hidden that is from us but “instead of giving you the most broadly popular result, Google now tries to predict what you are most likely to click on”. During his talk Technology, Entertainment, and Design (TED) in May 2011, Pariser warns that “the internet shows us what it thinks we want to see, but not necessarily what we need to see”. (Pariser, 2011) He gave an example of two users searching for the same key work at the same time but getting completely different results. Many other users are also concerned with Google dominance in the complete web experience especially social search. Many users wish not to be seen what they are sharing and reading and I don't really want to know what others are doing. They do not want to be influenced and maintain objective approach to research. Dennis Pierce writes how have huge implications this new web search formulas will have for students. He sees the filtering system as a negative feature. "The system they [Google] have created now relies more heavily on our history of preferences than on an objective calculation of relevance to bring certain resources to the front of the pack". (Pierce, 2011) In his eyes this will most certainly narrow students' searches and affect the quality of their researches. In the eSchool News article, education consultant Angela Meiers shares similar point of view as Pierce: “If students, researchers, and educators want their writings, videos, websites, and other online works to appear near the top of an internet search, they’ll have to understand how these new rules work in order to take advantage of them”. She concludes that “The larger our online social networks are the more authority we’ll possess on the web and the better our search results will be, too. If we make a diverse group of connections online, she explained, we’re more likely to be exposed to different points of view in our internet searches”. The rise of personal search should prompt teachers and students alike to build broad but trusted networks online, so as to help offset any filter bubble and to help return better search results. And while that’s good advice to be sure, it will be interesting to see how personal search will (and won’t) work when it comes to shared computers in places like schools and libraries. “Most people don’t “log in” on these terminals, and as such, they won’t have access to the benefits (and yes, there are benefits) of personalized search results.” (Watters, 2011) According to the Experian Hitwise source from September 2011, in US one-word searches were the majority of searches (26.45 %) of all search volume (see table below). 15


4. Methods 4.1 Research strategy The approach most suited for gathering information in this research will be experiment. The advantage of this methodology is less bias results comparing with the experiment involving humans using their own private Google Accounts. To justify my decision further, there is no concern over the data privacy issues and I that gives me more control over the Google profiles I create. Gathering group of poorly motivated volunteers could also put the project in risk. This method is also quick and low cost, and that it can be used to collect many different kinds of information. Analysing the data will be mainly quantitative. Process As described by Oates, below are the characteristics of a research strategy based on experiment (Oates, 2006). This process was described by Oat in her book “Researching Information Systems and Computing�, which is the one of the best suited literature for topic of this dissertation. 1. Observation and measurement. I will run a query with the Search term 1 and capture top ten Personal Search results in the spreadsheet. I will also keep the record of the social connections from Technology category linked with the G+ account. 2. Manipulation of circumstances. In consecutive rounds I will add to G+ account another ten social links.

16


3. Re-observation and re-measurement. I will run a query with the same Search term 1 and capture top ten Personal Search results in the spread sheet. I will observe and try to identify changes in the results. I will repeat these steps by adding consecutive four Batches of ten links each and measuring the Personal search results. 4. Proving or disapproving relationship. I will analyse and interpret the data in attempt to prove or disapprove the relationship between cause and effect. 5. Identification of casual factors. Cause – number of social connections Effect – number of unique search results comparing with other Batches 6. Explanation Hopefully after analysing and interpreting captured data, it will be possible to explain the mechanism for the cause-effect relationship. 7. Prediction. If conclusions are firm enough and support my hypothesis I shall be able to predict future events and prove that cause will always have the same effect. 8. Repetition. The experiment will be repeated number of times using various combinations of search terms.

4.2 Aim The purpose of the experiment I conduct is to investigate the relationship between the cause and effect I will observe in the measured data. The objective of this project is to research how Google’s personal search will impact the researchers’ results. Google search engines are personalised for the Google account users I will present the hypothesis so that can be tested empirically. The experiment’s outcome hopefully will allow me to prove or disapprove my hypothesis. To ensure that reliable conclusions can be drawn I will repeat the experiment number of times using different variables.

4.3. Designing experiment My experiment has been divided into two phases. During Phase one I search for the term related to the modules taught in the MSc course in Information Systems and Technology. I run the query with the social connections from the Technology category and from various nontechnology related categories in order to establish how it influences the search results. The analysis of Experiment 1 will lead to Experiment 2 where I research how number of social links from the same Technology category influences the search results. Experiment 2 will be 17


much more complex with covering Module related search terms with various level of complexity. 4.3.1. Google Plus personas For the experiment purposes I created five Google accounts with different social links reflecting the areas of interests of the created personas:    

cityuni01@gmail.com cityuni02@gmail.com cityuni03@gmail.com cityuni04@gmail.com

4.3.2. Categories of Social connections If user prefers to extend online social circle, Google suggests you interesting People and Pages to follow. They are grouped in the Categories such as Sport, Food, Technology, Music, etc. The full list of all categories can be found in G+ profile under “Explore” button and then under “Find people & pages” link. Below is the screenshot showing how this is presented to G+ user.

18


4.3.3. Social connection types The tested Google Plus account (G+) will be initially linked with ten social connections from the Technology category as suggested by Google directory. The Categories are available within Google Plus and Google’s algorithm determined which G+ users fall under each category. There are two types of Google user accounts:  

Person – any individual who opens G+ account is assigned with the person account Page – profile page for the organisation, usually set up by the company, online magazine, etc.

Both types have got access to the functionality such as: creating posts, adding others to own social circles, connecting other websites with the account. In both Experiments, mixture of both types of social connections will be linked with the G+ account. 4.3.4. Query types For the purpose of the experiment I selected search terms that would be most likely chosen by the student of the IST course at City University. The Information Systems and Technology course consisted of eight modules during two semesters As described by Broden in his publication, the web search queries can be divided into three main categories: 

Navigational – when user is searching only for the URL to the specific website, e.g. company’s website. In this case user’s goal usually is to only one particular link.

Transactional – user requires further interaction with the website, for example searching for a product to purchase online or download files. This query may return various links to the websites where user can carry out online transaction or other web services.

Informational – user searches for the answer to the questions or information on the topic. This type of query may return many websites relevant to the query.

According to Broden’s survey approximately 26% of the queries are “navigational”, 36% are “transactional” and 73% are “informational” (Broden, 2002). In my experiment I assume that most of the students will search for the “Informational” query. As many students usually are required to prepare before the session and for the coursework or the examination. The “Informational” type of query is the most popular among students who research on particular topic.

4.3.5. Variables 

Independent variable in both Experiments will be the number of social connections added to the G+ account in Batches of ten.

Dependent variable will be top ten unique Personal Search results for each Batch of social connections

19


4.3.6. Controls In order to focus only on the Google Plus social connections and how they affect the Personal Search results I will exclude the variables that will affect the outcome of the experiment. I will ensure that the experiment is run in the same conditions by eliminating below variables. 

Web history - one of the factors taken into account by the Google’s algorithm for the Personal Search results. Throughout the whole experiment I will disable the Web History functionality for tested Google Plus accounts. I will also delete all present Web History so it does not contaminate the outcome.

Web browser -I will use the same browser throughout the whole experiment for all search terms to ensure the same conditions are met. The web browser is the latest Google Chrome version 23.0.1271.95m

Date - Queries for the particular search term will be run on the same date for all Batches of social connection linked to the G+ account

Geo-location - All queries will be run from the same computer using the same IP address and in the same geo-location

Gmail contacts - will not be connected with the experimental Google Account

External links and accounts - will be not connected to the experimental Google Account

RSS feeds - None of the experimental Google Account will subscribe to Google Reader

4.3.7. Abbreviations used during the experiment PS1 – Personal Search results for Batch1 of 10 social connections linked with the Goole Plus account PS2 – Personal Search results for Batch2 of 20 social connections linked with the Goole Plus account PS3 – Personal Search results for Batch3 of 30 social connections linked with the Goole Plus account 20


PS4 – Personal Search results for Batch4 of 40 social connections linked with the Goole Plus account ST1 – Search Term 1 ST2 – Search Term 2 ST3 – Search Term 3 ST4 – Search Term 4

4.4. Planning Experiment 1 Purpose of this experiment is to determine what the impact is on the personal search results for the G+ account linked to the social connections from the Technology category against social connections from outside Technology category. All three search terms are related to the modules taught during the MSc IS&T course at City University. I selected names of three different modules as search terms for this experiment:   

Search term 1: database Search term 2: system specification Search term 3: information architecture

4.4.1. Technology category I created one G+ account plus with ten social connections from the Technology category. Then I ran a Search Term 1 and recorded Personal Search results (PS). I repeated the cycle three times adding each time ten new social connections from the Technology category for the same search term. Number of social links 10 10 10

Batch PS1 PS2 PS3

Category Technology Technology Technology

List of Google Plus social connections for Experiment 1 from Technology category is shown in Appendix B

21


4.4.2. Non-Technology category I created another G+ account plus with ten social connections from Fashion category, I ran a Search term 1 and recorded mixed Personal Search results. I repeated the cycle three times adding each time ten new social connections from Sports category and Music category. Number of social links 10 10 10

Batch PS1 PS2 PS3

Category Fashion Sports Music

List of Google Plus social connections for Experiment 1 from mixed non-Technology categories is shown in Appendix C 4.4.3. Process Below diagram shows how the experiment has been conducted.

22


23


4.5. Planning Experiment 2 The purpose of the Experiment 2 is to determine whether the number of social connections from the Technology category has got influence on the search results and what the overlapping rate is. I created G+ account plus with ten social connections from the Technology category. Then I ran a Search Term 1 and recorded Personal Search results (PS). I repeated the cycle four times adding each time ten new social connections from the Technology category for the same search term. Number of social links 10 10 10 10

Batch PS1 PS2 PS3 PS4

Category Technology Technology Technology Technology

Social connections for all four Batches for Experiment 2 are presented in Appendix D Below chart shows the percentage of the social links for each Batch. Batch 1 has got 10 social links when I run a query. In Batch 2, I add ten more social links which makes 50% of total social links. Another ten social links in Batch 3 make 33% out of total thirty social links. In last Batch 4, I add another 10 social links which make 25% of total forty social links. PS2

PS3

PS4

New social links

10

10

10

Total social links Ratio of new social links vs. total social links

20

30

40

50%

33%

25%

If the overlapping ratio of search results for PS2, PS3, PS4 against PS1 was proportional to the number of social connections in each Batch, the distribution would look like shown on the chart below. Proportional distribution of the overlapping Personal search results for PS2, PS3, PS4 against PS1: 100% 80% 60% Series1

40% 20% 0% PS2

PS3

PS4

24


4.5.1. Search terms The search terms related to the MSc IS&T modules were divided into four levels of complexity as in the real-life situation when students are searching for further information about the modules and drill down to the session and combination of other search terms.    

Search term Search term Search term Search term

1: Name of the module 2: Name of the first session 3: Name of the second session 4: Phrase combining keywords from above queries

Module: Databases Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4

database SQL Data Manipulation Language Conceptual Database Design Entity Relationship SQL manipulation language database design XML

Module: Web Applications Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4

web application introduction to web applications development server side scripting with PHP web application server side scripting with PHP SQL JavaScript

Module: Systems Specifications Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4

Systems Specifications Activity Diagram Use Case System Specification activity case

Module: E-Commerce Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4

E-Commerce Web 2.0 Technologies Building E-Commerce Website E-Commerce website Web 2.0 business

Module: Information and Knowledge Management Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4

Information and Knowledge Management Information economics Managing information organisation Information and Knowledge Management economics organisation overload

25


Category: Information Architecture Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4

Information Architecture Organisational Systems Navigation Findability Search Information Architecture Search Navigation

4.5.2. Process Below diagram shows how the experiment has been conducted.

26


27


4.6. Data-gathering The amount of data collected during this experiment was very large. Especially in Experiment 2 there were four Search Terms for each Module, run for four Batches and generating ten Results each time. Total data gathered during both Experiments reached 1053search results and 100 social connections. Apart from 1053 URLs gathered during both experiments, my further analysis also generated additional enormous datasets. This was a big challenge to present both raw data and analysed data in clear clearly. In order to provide the evidence of my study I collated datasets in Appendixes in the possibly most concise manner. 

Appendixes A-C: list of G+ social connections

Appendixes D-E: list of Google’s personal search results

Appendix G: rank breakdown, overlapping ratio and correlation between relevant Batches

I made all efforts to remove unnecessary information that is not related to this research. My objective was to keep data to minimum without overwhelming the reader. These data sets are documented evidence of my research and may be used for future studies to analyse data in other research projects. Wherever it was possible I collated graphs together on one page to analyse them easier and give better overview to the reader. Especially charts with average overlapping rates share the same scale and legend, hence could be put next to each other. The same principles I used when it was possible for the data presented in the tables to improve the clear presentation without compromising results’ details. 4.6.1. Visual Aids I used for Quantitative data analysis 

Tables - I selected tables as they are suitable for all types of data. It is possible to make them more complicated for the purposes of analysing the results and create graphs.

Scatter graph – they are good to show a relationship between two variables. “The more closely the points tend to cluster around a line, the closer a relationship between variables” (Oates, 2006). I can present whether the relationship is more positive or negative. In my dissertation I used this graph to present relationship between two sets of results in the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.

Line graph with Markers – used to show data from the tables. Especially useful to present the distribution of the overlapping ratio with multiple color-coded values without overwhelming the reader. I provided information about the units and the scale for the columns. I was able to collate many graphs next to each other

4.6.2. Observation and measurement Data gathered during the experiment for further analysis will be captured only from the first screen of Google search results. According to Silverstein 85.2% of people using AltaVista viewed only one screen per query and only 7.5% viewed second screen. (Silverstein, 1999).

28


As the there is more information produced every year users are often overwhelmed with many more results then they can compute. Spink confirmed that since Silverstein’s studies users are likely to view even fewer pages in future (Spink, 2002)

4.7. Analysis I wrote complex formulas in MS Excel to identify overlapping results and provide its rank in relevant Batches. I also used this software to present the data in table format and graphs. Some of them required to be modified manually for clearer presentation. 4.7.1. Correlation In order to determine the correlation between two sets of search results, I will use the Spearman's rank correlation algorithm during my experiment. (Spearman, 1904). This rank correlation “is simply the correlation of the observed bivariate ranks of two variables” (Borkowf, 2002). The Correlation table shows the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between related sets of data for each pair of Batches. I used the MS Excel spreadsheet to calculate the Spearman’s rank Correlation coefficient value, which can be between -1 (negative coefficient) or +1 (positive coefficient). This is presented on a Scatter graph as dots shaping a line going down (for -1 value) or going up (for +1 value). Zero means there is no relationship between both sets of data. 4.7.2. Standard Deviation I will use the Standard deviation algorithm to measure the variability of the average overlapping search results. I will measure how widely values within column for particular Batch are dispersed from the mean value. “The larger SD is, the larger average distance each data value is from mean” (Oates, 2006). This measure will help me to identify pattern in the Average overlapping ratio values for further statistical analysis. I used the MS Excel spreadsheet to calculate the Standard deviation value. This measure is not recommended for the set of data with extreme values.

4.8. Tools MS Excel – used the spreadsheet to analyse huge set of data and create graphs MS Word – used it to write content of the Dissertation and put together all tables, diagrams, graphs and images. Google Chrome – web browser used to carry out my Experiment and access resources for my research Google Plus – Social network with available Personal Search feature required to carry out my Experiments Cacoo – free tool to create diagrams and wireframes Quick Mark-up – free extension to Google Chrome which I used to capture screenshots and mark them up. 29


Gantt project – Free project management tool I used to organise my workload at the proposal stage and monitor progress further through the project life cycle.

5. Results In this chapter I would like to present the results gathered during both Experiments. For clarity I placed the results in table format for Experiment 1 in Appendix E and results for Experiment 2 in Appendix F. Total data gathered during both Experiments reached 1053 search results and 100 social connections. The scale of the task to conduct this Experiment was very big and it was also difficult to analyse such huge set of data. I documented the results as evidence and systematically analysed further to support my line of argument.

Results in Experiment 1

93

Results in Experiment 2

960

G+ social connections

100

Total records

1153

5.1. Experiment 1 results As an evidence of the outcome of Experiment 1, all results are presented in table formats in Appendix E. 5.1.1. Datasets in Experiment 1 Categories (Tech and non-Tech)

2

Modules (in each category)

3

Search terms (for each Module)

1

Batches (for each Search term)

3

Results (in particular Batch)

10

5.1.2. Observation and Analysis for Experiment 1 All queries for Experiment 1 were conducted on the same day: 26th November 2012. The social connections from the Technology category returned more than ten results for each Batch and for all search terms. For the non-Technology most of the time there were no results returned for the search terms. Only three search results were returned when ten social connections from the Music category were added to the G+ account. Search term 1

Search term 2

Search term 3

Fashion

0

0

0

Sports

0

0

0

Music

3

0

0

30


I conclude that social connections from non-Technology category do not have strong impact on the search term results associated with the module names taught during MSc IS&T course. The result of Experiment 1 has led me to Experiment 2 described below.

5.2. Experiment 2 results As an evidence of the outcome of Experiment 2, all results are presented in table formats in Appendix F. Each table shows top ten Search results for each Batch, for particular Search term and within particular Module. In Appendix F there are 96 tables with 960 search results in total. The outcome of Experiment 1 led me to Experiment 2 exploring the number of social connections from Technology category affecting the search results. 5.2.1. Datasets in Experiment 2 Modules

6

Search terms (for each Module)

4

Batches (for each Search term)

4

Results (in particular Batch)

10

5.2.2. Observations and conclusions All queries for Experiment 1 were conducted on the same day: 27th November 2012. The data was analysed to find the overlapping search results ratio. In Appendix G I present rank breakdown and overlapping ratio to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2. The columns are labelled with Batches numbers that have been compared. I will use the very first table from Appendix G (Module Databases, ST1) as an example to explain. In this table the third column is labelled PS3 vs. PS1. This column shows Search results for PS3 that overlapped with the results in PS1. The numbers in the column indicate on which position the results were in the Batch that has been compared to (PS1). For example Result nr.1 has got the same rank in both Batches, but other result nr.4 in PS3 was positioned as nr.2 in PS1. At the bottom of the column is the overlapping ratio, in this case 6 out of 10 results overlapped, which is 60%. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 q 10

PS3 vs PS1 1

2 3 6 7 8 60.0%

31


In Appendix G, I also collated a percentage breakdown of the overlapping of Search results between all Batches for particular Search term within particular Module. In this example it is Search term 1 (ST1) in Databases Module, with highlighted value 60% which we have just examined in previous step.

Overlapping PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

100.0%

100.0%

60.0%

40.0%

PS2

100.0%

100.0%

60.0%

40.0%

PS3

60.0%

60.0%

100.0%

60.0%

PS4

40.0%

40.0%

60.0%

100.0%

The Correlation tables are also in Appendix G and they show the relation between each Batch. In this example all compared results were in the same order which calculated value Rho=1. 5.2.3. Analysis of the overlapping ratio for Search terms On next page I presented the table and graphs with average overlapping comparison of Search results in PS2, PS3, PS4 against PS1 for each Search terms in all modules. The distribution in E-commerce module is different from all the modules and is very flat with the standard variation between 19-22%. It also shows that while the complexity of the Search term increases, its presentation on the chart goes consistently higher with higher overlapping ratio. Apart from this module there is no pattern indicating that the complexity of the search term has got an effect on the overlapping ratio. For the batches PS2, PS3, PS4 the overlapping rate is only 10%, 0%, 0%. It means that PS3 and PS4 have got all unique search results comparing to PS1 and PS2 has got 90% unique results comparing with PS1 Graphs for other modules have got characteristics of sharp drop from PS2 to PS3 and much more flat presentation between PS3 and PS4 (in more than half of cases it is a horizontal line) .. Interestingly in IKM module ST2, ST3, ST4 have got 0% for PS3 and PS4, which means that all search results in these two Batches did not overlap at all with PS1. This module shows the biggest average gap between Batches with PS2 at 48% dropping to PS3 and PS4 both at 5%. Search terms in IA module have got the lowest Standard Deviation 8% in all three Batches. The standard Deviation is also low in IKM module (15%, 10%, 10%). Search terms in other modules show much higher variability with the highest Standard Deviation 29% in Systems Specification module (PS2). There’s no pattern in the distribution of the Standard Deviation for Batches across the Modules. It is usually around the same value for all three Batches within given Module, apart from Systems Specification (29%, 10%, 13%).

32


5.2.4. Overlapping comparison of search results in PS2, PS3, PS4 against PS1 for each Search term in Experiment 2

Databases

Search term 1 Search term 2 Search term 3 Search term 4 Standard Dev.

PS2 100% 80% 50% 70% 21%

PS3 60% 70% 20% 70% 24%

Systems Specification

Web Applications PS4 40% 70% 20% 60% 22%

PS2 60% 80% 70% 90% 13%

PS2

PS3

PS3 60% 70% 30% 60% 17%

PS4 50% 70% 30% 60% 17%

PS2 60% 50% 10% 80% 29%

PS3 20% 30% 10% 30% 10%

PS4 10% 30% 0% 20% 13%

E-Commerce PS2 10% 10% 30% 50% 19%

PS3 0% 10% 30% 50% 22%

PS4 0% 10% 20% 50% 22%

Information and Knowledge Management PS2 PS3 PS4 60% 20% 20% 40% 0% 0% 30% 0% 0% 60% 0% 0% 15% 10% 10%

PS2 30% 40% 20% 30% 8%

PS2

PS2

Information Architecture PS3 20% 20% 10% 30% 8%

PS4 20% 20% 10% 30% 8%

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% PS2

PS3 Databases

PS4

PS4

Web Applications

PS2

PS3

PS4

Systems Specification

33

PS2

PS3

PS4

E-Commerce

PS3 IKM

PS4

PS3 IA

PS4


5.2.5. Analysis of the overlapping ratio for Modules On next page I presented the table and graphs with average overlapping comparison of search results PS2, PS3, PS4 against PS1 for each Module in all Search terms. Databases and Web Applications modules have got exactly the same distribution in ST2 and ST3.This may be due to the fact that both modules are very similar and the curriculum covered many similar lectures and search terms. These two Modules are on top of all Search term chart. Interestingly the IKM module has got 0% overlapping for PS3, PS4 across all three ST2, ST3, ST4. Similarly as on the previous charts, there’s a sharp drop from PS2 to PS3 and then horizontal line between PS3 and PS4 in 70% of cases. For ST2 all modules have got constant line between PS3 and PS4. Variability is higher than comparing with previous chart. Standard Deviation ranges between 12% for ST3 up to 31% for ST1. Also here there’s no pattern in the distribution of the Standard Deviation for Batches across the Search terms.

34


5.2.6. Overlapping comparison of search results in PS2, PS3, PS4 against PS1 for each Module in Experiment 2 Search term 1

Search term 2

Search term 3

Search term 4

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS2

PS3

PS4

Databases Web Applications Systems Specification E-commerce Information and Knowledge Management

100% 60% 60% 10% 60%

60% 60% 20% 0% 20%

40% 50% 10% 0% 20%

80% 80% 50% 10% 40%

70% 70% 30% 10% 0%

70% 70% 30% 10% 0%

50% 70% 10% 30% 30%

20% 30% 10% 30% 0%

20% 30% 0% 20% 0%

70% 90% 80% 50% 60%

70% 60% 30% 50% 0%

60% 60% 20% 50% 0%

Information Architecture

30%

20%

20%

40%

20%

20%

20%

10%

10%

30%

30%

30%

Standard Deviation

31%

24%

19%

27%

30%

30%

22%

12%

12%

22%

25%

24%

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% PS2

PS3 Search term 1

PS4

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS2

Search term 2

PS3 Search term 3

35

PS4

PS2

PS3 Search term 4

PS4


5.2.7. Average overlapping of search results PS2, PS3, PS4 against Batch PS1 for each Search term (across all modules) After analysing the overlapping ratio separately for each Search term and each Module, I calculated the average overlapping ratio for each Search Term from all the Modules. Graph below shows the distribution of the Search terms ratios for each Batch. All Search terms look similar only with little different positioning in the graph. The Standard Deviation is around 10% and is very similar for each Batch.

PS2

PS3

PS4

Search term 1

53%

30%

23%

Search term 2

50%

33%

33%

Search term 3

35%

17%

13%

Search term 4

63%

40%

37%

Standard Deviation

12%

10%

11%

100% 90% 80% 70% 60%

Search term 1

50%

Search term 2 Search term 3

40%

Search term 4

30% 20% 10% 0% PS2

PS3

PS4

36


5.2.8. Average overlapping of search results PS2, PS3, PS4 against Batch PS1 for each Module (taken from all search terms) Here I consistently calculated the average overlapping ratio for each Module from all the Search terms. Graph below shows the distribution of the Module ratios for each Batch. The distribution of the Modules is not that similar as on the previous graph. The Standard Deviation is around 20% and very similar for each Batch. This value is twice as high comparing with previous graph.

PS2 75% 75% 50% 25% 48% 30%

Databases Web Applications Systems Specification E-commerce Information and Knowledge Management Information Architecture Standard Deviation

PS3 55% 55% 23% 23% 5% 20%

21%

PS4 48% 53% 15% 20% 5% 20%

20%

100% 90% Databases

80% 70%

Web Applications

60%

Systems Specification

50% E-commerce

40% 30%

Information and Knowledge Management

20%

Information Architecture

10% 0% PS2

PS3

PS4

37

19%


Next step is to work out average of all Search terms and all Modules from two previous graphs. In the table below is the outcome of my calculation of the average overlapping ratio of search results PS2, PS3, PS4 against Batch PS1 for all Search terms and all Modules. I compared it with the Proportional ratio distribution I stated in my hypothesis. Both distributions of Average overlapping results are very similar with only 2% standard deviation. Interesting is fact that individual Modules and Search terms have got very wide variability in most cases. However after averaging it, it turns out to be almost identical with the distribution of the Proportional ratio. This proves that the hypothesis is correct. Graph below is the visual presentation of the data in the table. PS2

PS3

PS4

Average overlapping results for all Search terms

50.4%

30.0%

26.7%

Average overlapping results for all Modules

53.3%

30.0%

23.3%

Proportional ratio

50.0%

33.3%

25.0%

Standard Deviation

2%

2%

2%

100.0% 90.0%

Average overlapping for all four search terms

80.0% 70.0% 60.0%

Average overlapping for all modules

50.0% 40.0% 30.0%

Proportional ratio

20.0% 10.0% 0.0% PS2

PS3

PS4

38


5.2.9. Average overlapping ratio results between other Batches Using the algorithm to work out the average overlapping results in the previous graph, I calculated the relation between all Batches for all Search terms. Instead of the average overlapping of search results PS2, PS3, PS4 against Batch PS1 only, I calculated it for all the Batches. First line of the table shows the results we have just analysed in previous step the overlapping in PS1 only. Line 2 shows the Average overlapping of the search results from other Batches but in PS2 this time.

Average overlapping ratio PS1 PS2 PS3 PS4

PS1 100.0% 50.4% 30.0% 26.7%

PS2 50.4% 100.0% 66.3% 60.4%

PS3 30.0% 66.3% 100.0% 90.4%

PS4 26.7% 60.4% 90.4% 100.0%

In order to make a comparison, below I also calculated the proportional ratio of all social connections between all Batches. Ratio of all social connections PS1 PS2 PS3 PS4

PS1 100% 50% 33% 25%

PS2 50% 100% 67% 50%

PS3 33% 67% 100% 75%

PS4 25% 50% 75% 100%

Purpose of this calculation was to check whether the hypothesis t valid for relation with PS1, will be also valid for other Batches. On average 66.3% of the results in PS3 overlapped with the search results in PS2 which is very close to the predicted number from the table with ratio of social connections. However there are two values that don’t quite match:  

PS4 vs. PS2 is 60.4% (which is 10% more than predicted value) PS4 vs. PS3 is 90.4% (which is 15% more than predicted value).

For PS4 the overlapping ratio in PS3 and PS2 is higher than the proportional ratio shows. It is noticeable that in particular the average overlapping ratio between PS3 and PS4 is 90.4% rather than 75%. This means there is not much difference whether user has got 30 or 40 Social connections linking to the G+ account, as there will be only 10% of new results, rather than expected 25% of new results.

39


5.2.10. Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Majority of compared Batches had rho=1 which indicates an ideal positive relationship between two sets of data. The breakdown with the correlation between each Batch is shown in Appendix G. This correlation did not become useful answering my research question. However I decided to include it in the Appendix G in case it becomes useful for other colleagues willing to analyse it for own projects. As an example to demonstrate my understanding of how the Correlation coefficient works I demonstrate below its graph. I selected two cases with Rho different then value 1. Below I present two charts showing the distribution for module Information and Knowledge Management, Search terms 1 and 2 for Batches PS2 vs PS1. Rho = 0.9

Search term 1: PS2 vs PS1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

PS1

0

2

4

6

8

10

Rho = -0.6

Search term 2: PS2 vs PS1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

PS1

0

2

4

6

8

40

10


6. Discussion, Reflection & Conclusions From the results I analysed during my experiments I conclude that new social connections added to the G+ account have impact on the personal Search results. Comparing results in batches PS2, PS3, PS4 against the PS1 the overlapping ration is proportional to new social connections added. This proves that my hypothesis is valid. However, when I compare the results in Batches PS3, PS4 against the PS2, my hypothesis applies only to the PS3 vs. PS2 pair with the 66.3% overlapping ratio which is close to the predicted ratio of 67%. For the pair PS4 vs. PS2 the overlapping ratio is 60.4%, which is 10% more than predicted value. A pair PS4 vs. PS3 has got overlapping ratio 90.4%, which is 15% higher than predicted 75%. The discrepancy between predicted overlapping and average overlapping ratio increases with more social connections. Discrepancy in overlapping ratio 1.7% 10.4% 15.4%

PS4 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS3

Discrepancy 20.0% 15.0% 10.0%

Discrepancy

5.0% 0.0% PS4 vs PS1

PS4 vs PS2

PS4 vs PS3

This requires further research an analysis to go with the research beyond maximum 40 social connections used in this project and perhaps answer the research question: What is the overlapping ratio for social connections higher than 40? From the current data it seems there is a trend that more social connections has got effect on more overlapping results than predicted. This may leads to the conclusion that personal search narrows learner’s outlook, returning overlapping results at higher rate than new social connections. Coming back to the Research Question: Does Google’s personal search broaden or narrow learners’ outlook and perspectives? From the data collected during this research and conclusions, I would answer that for this project’s scope Google’s personal search narrows learners’ outlook. Since my social links are all from the Technology category, it means that some search results may be linked to multiple social connections I have added to my G+ account. Many people prefer to extend social circles in hope to get exposure to various Search results and different links. But some users may prefer to receive the Search results from one category only. For example person studying Information System searching for the word “Database” would prefer to receive search result relevant to the nature of studied subject. Hence will prefer results only from the social connection from the same category (e.g. Technology). If the social connections 41


come from mixed categories that are not related to the subject of studies this may return irrelevant results. This is visible in the Experiment 1, where I used the G+ persona with nonTechnology social connections. During whole experiment only three search results were returned, all linking to one social connection and its content was not relevant to the studied subject (in this case it was “Musician and Band Public Database”). Even though it included the sought search term “Database” it was not relevant. There were also many results from the social connections within the Technology category too. For example peoples who have nicknames including the search term and comment on a post, would be picked up in the search results, not being relevant. For example if someone with the nickname “database_master79” comments on the post about fashion, this will be returned as a search result and most probably will not relevant to the subject of user’s research. Results returned for social connection from each category for the Search terms used in Experiment 1: Technology category

non-Technology category

90

3

It shows how little results are returned for the social connections from outside Technology category. During writing my dissertation I’ve learnt a lot about Google products and I demonstrated how to overcome setbacks to accomplish the project with successful results.

6.1. Suggestions for further research Scope of my project did not cover the relevancy, however this is a very interesting topic for further studies, to compare the relevancy of the search results and answer the question: How additional social connections affect the relevancy of the search results? And answer: What is the relation between overlapping and relevancy for additional social connections? I also would like to indicate interesting fact of different types of social connections present in Google Plus. It would be worthwhile exploring this are and answer the question: For which type of social connections, “Persons” or “Pages”, the search results are more relevant? OR What is the overlapping ratio for social connection types “Persons” and “Pages”? In this project I used the search terms taken from the real-life modules taught at the City University. I would be interesting to distinguish them between different query types and analyse the overlapping and relevancy to answer the question: What is the overlapping ratio for various query types: Navigational, Transactional, Informational? It would be also interesting to repeat the same experiment again and analyse rank of the search results between Batches.

42


6.2. Areas for improvement I identified number of issues with functionality of the Google search engine that resulted in making it difficult to approach the problem outlined in my research question. For future research fellows who wish to pursuit research project on Google search engine it will be advisable to seriously consider the risk associated with Google's frequent changes. This is dictated by Google's business objectives by experimenting with new layouts and functionalities. The current features may be removed with no prior warning which can be frustrating for the researcher and risky for the future of the project.

43


References Adams, Paul. 2011. Why I left Google. What happened to my book. What I work on at Facebook. Available at: http://www.thinkoutsidein.com/blog/2011/07/why-i-left-google-whathappened-to-my-book-what-i-work-on-at-facebook/ [Accessed 18 November 2012] Agrawal, Rakesh. Gollapudi, Sreenivas. 2009. Diversifying Search Results. WSDM Barcelona Alexander, Bryan. 2006. Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning? Available at: http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume41/Web20 ANewWaveofInnovationforTe/158042 [Accessed 28 May 2012] Allen, Paul. 2011. Google+ Growth Accelerating. Passes 62 million users. Adding 625,000 new users per day. Prediction: 400 million users by end of 2012. Available at: https://plus.google.com/117388252776312694644/posts/ZcPA5ztMZaj [Accessed 28 May 2012] Borkowf, C B. 2002. Computing the nonnull asymptotic variance and the asymptotic relative efficiency of Spearman's rank correlation. Volume 39, Issue 3, Pages EX1-EX2, 261-370 (28 May 2002) Boulton, Clint. 2012. HTTPS Encryption Default For Google Searchers. Available at: http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/news/https-encryption-default-for-registered-googlesearchers-42793 [Accessed 28 December 2012] Broder, A. 2002. A taxonomy of Web Search. SIGIR Forum, Fall 2002 Bughin, J., Corb, L., Manyika, J., Nottebohm, O., Chui, M., de Muller Barbat, B., Said, R. 2011. The impact of Internet technologies: Search. Available at: http://www.touchstonewebworks.com/images/use_of_vertical_search_engines.pdf [Accessed 28 May 2012] Cacoo diagram tool. Available at: https://cacoo.com [Accessed 19 May 2012] Capannini, Gabriele. Nardini, Franco Maria. 2011. Efficient Diversification of Web Search Results. VLDB Endowment, Vol. 4, No. 7 Coppel, Yohann. 2011. Social Search goes global. Available at: http://googlesocialweb.blogspot.com/2011/05/social-search-goes-global.html [Accessed 28 May 2012] Flacy, Mike. 2012. Google replaces the +1 button with a Google+ share link in search listings. Available at: http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/google-replaces-the-1-button-with-agoogle-share-link-in-search-listings/ [Accessed 6 September 2012] Gantt Project. Available at: http://www.ganttproject.biz/ [Accessed 10 April 2012] Google Chrome. Available at: https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/ [Accessed 2 March 2012] Google Plus. Available at: http://www.google.com/+/learnmore/ [Accessed 21 March 2012]

44


Google. Search results from your friends and connections. Available at: http://support.google.com/websearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1710607 [Accessed 12 September 2012] Google. Search, plus Your World. Available at: http://www.google.com/insidesearch/features/plus/index.html [Accessed 3 September 2012] Griffiths, Jillian R. Brophy, Peter. 2005. Student Searching Behavior and the Web: Use of Academic Resources and Google. The Board of Trustees Ingram, Mathew. 2011. Hey Google — being social is not an engineering problem. Available at: http://gigaom.com/2011/07/13/hey-google-being-social-is-not-an-engineering-problem/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Ingram, Mathew. 2011. How social search is changing the search industry. Available at: http://pro.gigaom.com/2011/08/how-social-search-is-changing-the-searchindustry/?utm_source=tech&utm_medium=editorial&utm_campaign=intext&utm_term=3911 88+how-social-search-is-changing-the-search-industry-2&utm_content=mathewingram [Accessed 28 May 2012] Kao, Evelyn. 2011. Making search more secure. Available at: http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/making-search-more-secure.html [Accessed 28 December 2012] Liu, Sean. 2012. Google+. Available at: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SeanLiu/posts/c384DVbjxv5 [Accessed 30 July 2012] MacFarlane, A. 2011. Evaluation of Web search for the Information Practitioner. Centre for Interactive Systems Research, Department of Information Science, City University Malik, Om. 2011. Why Google+ won’t hurt Facebook, but Skype will hate it. Available at: http://gigaom.com/2011/06/28/why-google-plus-wont-hurt-facebook-but-skype-will-hate-it/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] McGee, Matt. 2011. Google+ Public Posts Coming To Google’s Social Search Results. Available at: http://searchengineland.com/google-public-posts-coming-to-googles-social-search-results89333 [Accessed 28 May 2012] Mich, Ann Arbor. 2012. Facebook Plummets; Google+ Strong in American Customer Satisfaction Index. Available at: http://www.theacsi.org/images/stories/images/news/12jul_press.pdf [August 2012] Morris, M., Teevan, J., Panovich, K. CHI 2010, April 10–15. What Do People Ask Their Social Networks, and Why?A Survey Study of Status Message Q&A Behaviour. Available at: http://people.csail.mit.edu/teevan/work/publications/papers/chi10-social.pdf [Accessed 28 May 2012] Nguyen, Hui. 2009. Improving search quality of the Google search appliance. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Oates, Briony. 2006. Researching Information Systems and Computing. Sage Publications Limited Odell, Seth. 2011. What Google+ REALLY Means for Higher Ed. Available at: http://higheredlive.com/what-google-really-means-for-higher-ed/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] 45


Page, Larry. 2011. Google+. Available at: https://plus.google.com/106189723444098348646/posts/EanXz8fLwDh [Accessed 28 May 2012] Pariser, Eli. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Viking an imprint of Penguin Books, 2011. Pierce, Dennis. 2011. New web-search formulas have huge implications for students and society. Available at: http://www.eschoolnews.com/2011/08/10/new-web-search-formulashave-huge-implications-for-students-and-society/? [Accessed 28 May 2012] Pinola, Melanie. 2011. Google+ Posts Will Appear on Google Social Search Results. Available at: http://www.pcworld.com/article/238027/google_posts_will_appear_on_google_social_search _results.html [Accessed 28 May 2012] Powers, Patrick. 2011. A recipe ripe for success: why Google+ will work for Higher Education. Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2011/07/21/why-google-will-workfor-higher-ed/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Quick Markup. Available at: http://www.quick-markup.com/ [Accessed 12 April 2012] Rampton, John. 2011. September 2011 Search Engine Market Share from comScore, Hitwise. Available at: http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2117170/September-2011-Search-EngineMarket-Share-from-comScore-Hitwise [Accessed 28 May 2012] Scott, Piers Dillon. 2011. Google social search – what it is and how it works. Available at: http://sociable.co/web/google-social-search-what-it-is-and-how-it-works/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Silverstein, S., Henzinger, M., Marais, H. and Moricz. 1999. Analysis of a very large web search engine query log. SIGIR Forum Spearman, C. 1904. The proof and measurement of association between two things. Amer. J. Psychol., 15 (1904), pp. 72–101 Spink A, Jansen B, Wolfram D, Saracevic T. 2002. From E-Sex to E-Commerce: Web search changes. IEEE Computer, 35 (2) (2002), pp. 133–135 Spiro, Rob. 2011. +1’s: the right recommendations right when you want them—in your search results. Available at: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/1s-right-recommendationsright-when-you.html [Accessed 28 May 2012] Sullivan, Danny. 2011. Meet +1: Google’s Answer To The Facebook Like Button. Available at: http://searchengineland.com/meet-1-googles-answer-to-the-facebook-like-button-70569 [Accessed 3 May 2012] Thelwall, Mike. 2002. Research note: in praise of Google: finding law journal Web sites. Online Information Review, Vol. 26 Iss: 4 pp. 271 - 272 Watters, Audrey. 2011. Google Plus Comes to Google Apps for (Higher) Education. Available at: http://www.hackeducation.com/2011/10/27/google-plus-comes-to-google-apps-for-highereducation/ [Accessed 28 May 2012]

46


Watters, Audrey. 2011. Will Google+ Replace Twitter or Facebook for Teachers? Available at: http://mindshift.kqed.org/2011/07/will-google-replace-twitter-or-facebook-for-teachers/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Young, Rob D. 2011. Google Plus Reaches 25 Million Users, Activity Declines. Available at: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-plus-reaches-25-million-users-activitydeclines/31500/ [Accessed 28 May 2012]

47


Appendix A Project Proposal

Project Proposal for MSc in Information Systems and Technology

Name: Filip Lubanski

Reg Nr: 110060153

Project Title: How will Google social search algorithm impact research and education? Supervisor: Jason Dykes

48


Introduction In past years we can see rapidly growing popularity of the social networks like Facebook, Twitter where users can network, communicate between each other and social search behaviour appears to be common. Google social search is an upgrade to existing Google’s search algorithm. This algorithm includes other users' recommendations and social media content personalised for each user.

“Social Search can help you find pages your friends have created, and it can also help you find links your contacts have shared on Twitter and other sites. If someone you’re connected to has publicly shared a link, we may show that link in your results with a clear annotation.” (Coppel, 2011)

In 2009 Google first introduced Social Search on google.com as an experimental feature. The intention was to help users find more relevant information from friends and the people they know. In June 2011 Google launched new social networking services Google Plus (also written as Google+ or G+) and reached over 65 million registered users in December 2011. The prediction is to reach 400 million users by the end of 2012, according to Paul Allen from New Startup.

Feature of Google is allowing users to click +1 on interesting links in order to recommend them to public or only to particular circles of friends. Users can also share, add a comment and send it to the right circles on Google Plus. Next time user's friends and contacts search on Google, they will be able to see friend's +1 recommendation. According to comScore Google’s search engine market in US climbed above 65 % in September 2011. Data collected from Google Plus and +1's affect Google search results.

Aims and objectives The aim of this research is to explore how the Google social search algorithm will impact education and research. It will analyse the process of social search and it's impact on research in academic environment.

It is a major goal of education to broaden learners’ outlook and perspectives. How can this occur if users are just getting fed the same type of information provided by the algorithm based on the search history and friends' recommendations? The possibility is also that it may narrow the search results of the individual researcher and thus lower the quality of the resources. This research will test if the use of Google, currently the most popular search engine on the web, provides users with a range of ways to search for particular topic and subject.

The research aims to address the following question: Does Google social search broaden or narrow learners’ outlook and perspectives?

49


Scope and definition The scope of this project is to research how Google social search will impact the results used for research purposes in education environment. Google search engines are personalised for the Google account users. For the purpose of this research a set of five Google accounts will be created. The search results will be compared from Google accounts against the generic search in order to determine the relevance of the outcome. The scope of the research needs to be narrowed down to the one-word search term in the field specific to the created Google account.

Research context / literature review Google Plus is fairly new service launched only this year, but already powerful core for the Google social search nowadays. During my research I noticed there's not many academic papers and professional journals related to my research question. Instead there's a lot of online literature in blogs and articles. This is an opportunity and a challenge to conduct academic research in this area and fill in the gap. I reviewed number of articles and books related to the topic. Below I would like to present selected views on the question how Google social search algorithm impacts researchers and education.

Yohann Coppel, Software Engineer, writes in Social Web Blog about Google's global aspirations. Google's Social Search was invented to help find more relevant information based on recommendations from people you know. It is continuous process to connect more people and peers with more relevant web results delivered to users globally. Google's goal is to get you the most relevant results as quickly as possible. But relevance is about relationships as well as words on webpages. “That’s why we recently started to include more information from people you know, information they’ve shared on Twitter, Flickr and other sites, in Google search results.” (Spiro, 2011)

Google enabled to share recommendations with the world right in Google’s search results through +1 feature. The advantage of +1’s is the relevance. You get the right recommendations from people you know when you are looking for information about the topic: “Say, for example, you’re planning a winter trip to Tahoe, Calif. When you do a search, you may now see a +1 from your slalom-skiing aunt next to the result for a lodge in the area. Or if you’re looking for a new pasta recipe, we’ll show you +1’s from your culinary genius college room mate” (Spiro, 2011). This search strategy can be easily applied to group of student in the same course to help each other to identify useful resources recommended by other student fellows they know. This would encourage the collaborative work among them, but also could be potentially subject to plagiarism.

This year Google took one step further, rolling out new social network Google Plus. Om Malik explains in his article that “Today, search is not just about pages, but also about people and the relevance of information to them”. Google brings Social Search to more users globally the ever before. “As tracked by comScore and noted by Search Engine Land, this one month timeline for 25 million users means that Google has reached that benchmark 20 times faster than any other social site.” (Rob D Young, 2011)

50


Now Google social search engine empowered with the Google Plus data about user's preferences can provide more precise search results in line with users' online activities. “Gaining access to the data users generate when they post status updates, share photos and comment on friends’ activities” (Mathew Ingram).

Google has decided to add only public posts from Google Plus to its social search results. “Social search has been adding annotations to search results when content from your social connections was shared on services such as Twitter, LinkedIn and others.” (McGee, 2011).

The private statuses will remain visible only to selected social circles and Melanie Pinola from PCWorld is enthusiastic about this strategy: “The move is another sign that our social networking statuses are seeping into all other areas of the web. And, the feature is actually pretty useful if you’re looking for relevant results”. (Pinola, 2011)

Patrick Powers thinks that Google Plus will work for higher education. Apart from many useful features including collaborative work he praises the robust research: "Both Facebook and Google+ encourage users to enter information about where they went to school. The difference is that this information is public and searchable inside Google+. Basically, this means one could search for XYX university and find scores of people identifying themselves as alumni. Without “friending” every fan out there, this information is difficult to track through Facebook." There are also voices of criticism from former Google's employee that behind the powerful search algorithms, the social aspect of the users should be considered. Paul Adams questions that Google cannot really understand social networks if it only sees them as sources of information for its search algorithms: "Google is an engineering company, and as a researcher or designer, it’s very difficult to have your voice heard at a strategic level. Ultimately I felt that although my research formed a cornerstone of the Google social strategy, and I had correctly predicted how other products in the market would play out, I wasn’t being listened to when it came to executing that strategy. My peers listened intently, but persuading the leadership was a losing battle. Google values technology, not social science".

Contrary to views on the helpful aspects of Google social search features, Eli Pariser explains in his book “The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You” how Google began customizing its search results for each user: “Google's change in policy is symptomatic of the most significant shift to take place on the Web in recent years-the rise of personalization (…) Pariser uncovers how this growing trend threatens to control how we consume and share information as a society-and reveals what we can do about it “. The Google algorithm personalises our search results with invisible filters, up to the point that we are not be able to search the hidden that is from us but “instead of giving you the most broadly popular result, Google now tries to predict what you are most likely to click on”. During his talk Technology, Entertainment, and Design (TED) in May 2011, Parises warns that “the internet shows us what it thinks we want to see, but not necessarily what we need to see”. He gave an example of two users searching for the same key work at the same time but getting completely different results. 51


Many other users are also concerned with Google dominance in the complete web experience especially social search. Many users wish not to be see what they are sharing and reading and I don't really want to know what others are doing. They do not want to be influenced and maintain objective approach to research. Dennis Pierce writes how have huge implications this new web search formulas will have for students. He sees the filtering system as a negative feature. "The system they [Google] have created now relies more heavily on our history of preferences than on an objective calculation of relevance to bring certain resources to the front of the pack". In his eyes this will most certainly narrow students' searches and affect the quality of their researches.

In the eSchool News article, education consultant Angela Meiers shares similar point of view as Pierce: “If students, researchers, and educators want their writings, videos, websites, and other online works to appear near the top of an internet search, they’ll have to understand how these new rules work in order to take advantage of them”. She concludes that “The larger our online social networks are, the more authority we’ll possess on the web and the better our search results will be, too. If we make a diverse group of connections online, she explained, we’re more likely to be exposed to different points of view in our internet searches”. The rise of social search should prompt teachers and students alike to build broad but trusted networks online, so as to help offset any filter bubble and to help return better search results. And while that’s good advice to be sure, it will be interesting to see how social search will (and won’t) work when it comes to shared computers in places like schools and libraries. “Most people don’t “log in” on these terminals, and as such, they won’t have access to the benefits (and yes, there are benefits) of personalized search results.” (Watters, 2011)

According to the Experian Hitwise source from September 2011, in US one-word searches were the majority of searches (26.45 %) of all search volume (see table below).

52


These one-word searches are the most affected by the Google social search personalisation algorithms and may return very narrow search results. This may reflect on the poor quality resources to support individual research.

Additional academic literature review will be extended: 

Search quality evaluation / measurement

Personalized social search in social network

Methodology In order to answer the Research Question I will conduct an experiment comparing the generic search results with the Google personal search results. Then I will try to establish the difference and its effect on the learners’ outlook and perspectives.

For the experiment purposes I will create multiple Google accounts with different social links reflecting the area of interest of the created persona. Then I will run a query, searching for the key word for particular module related to the area of interest of the Google profile. The search terms will consist of one-word related to the selected module taught at the City University.

The hypothesis required for this experiment will be: Google personal search are different from the organic search results.

The research tasks are described below. It may be required that Gathering / Analysing and Interpreting Data will be iterative process in order to collect enough evidence allowing to answer the Research Question.

1. Identify a problem: 

Does Google social search broaden or narrow learners’ outlook and perspectives?

2. Gather data: 

Create approximately five Google accounts 53


    

Build for each profile links reflecting the area of interest of the created persona Run a query, searching for the key word for particular module related to the area of interest of the Google profile obtain the search results for Google account personal search Run a query, searching for the same key word without using Google account obtain the search results for generic search

3. Analyse the data:  

Quantitive evaluating which results are relevant to the search term Quantitive measuring whether the results are narrow or broad

4. Interpret data:  

Interpret whether the outcome of the analysis answers the Research Question Proving or disapproving a relationship between the Google personal search results and the generic search results

5. Gather data if the evidence is not satisfactory to determine the answer to the Research Question:     

Add the web history to each profile related to the search term Run a query, searching for the key word for particular module related to the area of interest of the Google profile obtain the search results for Google account personal search Run a query, searching for the same key word without using Google account obtain the search results for generic search

6. Analyse the data:  

Quantitive evaluating which results are relevant to the search term Quantitive measuring whether the results are narrow or broad

7. Interpret data:   

Interpret whether the outcome of the analysis answers the Research Question Compare how the search results change with additional personalisation for each persona. Proving or disapproving a relationship between the Google personal search results and the generic search results

8. Gather data if the evidence is not satisfactory to determine the answer to the Research Question:   

Add to each profile “+1’s” for the links related to the search term Run a query, searching for the key word for particular module related to the area of interest of the Google profile obtain the search results for Google account personal search 54


 

Run a query, searching for the same key word without using Google account obtain the search results for generic search

9. Analyse the data:  

Quantitive evaluating which results are relevant to the search term Quantitive measuring whether the results are narrow or broad

10. Interpret data:   

Interpret whether the outcome of the analysis answers the Research Question Compare how the search results change with additional personalisation for each persona. Proving or disapproving a relationship between the Google personal search results and the generic search results

11. Conclusion:   

Draw a conclusion what are the pros and cons of the Google social search. Draw a conclusion about the effect of social network on search quality and relevance. Describe implications and the benefit of this research for the end-users of the system (which are learners).

The approach most suited for gathering information in this research will be Experiment. The advantage of this methodology is less bias results comparing with the experiment involving humans using their own private Google Accounts. There is no concern over the data privacy issues and I have more control over the Google profiles I create. This method is also quick and low cost, and that it can be used to collect many different kinds of information. Analysing the data will be mainly quantitative.

Before conducting the search exercise for each Google account persona, the search history from the web browser needs to be deleted.

Contribution / Beneficiaries The students and academics could better understand the process of obtaining search results and possible ways to broaden their resources. It also would help researchers to conduct more efficiently the search for collaborative work and sharing the resources. Users have to understand how these new rules work in order to take advantage of them.

Colleges and Universities may feel encouraged to set up official accounts in the fledgling social network Google Plus network. Universities could set up appropriate procedures in place to deal with the plagiarism effectively. 55


Risk The risk associated with this project may include: 

Google stops using the personal search. Likelihood: 1/10 Means of mitigation: carry out the experiment using other major web engine with personal search facility (eg Yahoo)

Difficulties with evaluating the quality of the search results Likelihood: 2/10 Means of mitigation: Ensure to allocate adequate time and resources during the project cycle

Not many white papers available Likelihood: 4/10 Means of mitigation: Explore other academic resources especially journals that are update more often.

Work plan Gantt below shows the distribution of the task during the project cycle on the time scale. This includes the identified risk areas with allocated adequate time. The deadline in the chart is set up to 24th of September rather than the original date 31st of September to allow extra time in case of unforeseen complications that can jeopardise the accomplishment of the project on time.

Resources The project will require creating five Google accounts to complete the experiment. Internet access and computer equipped with the web browser and MS Excel.

56


Ethical / Confidentiality Since there are no human participants involved, there’s no sensitive information or confidentiality issue.

References Coppel, Yohann. 2011. Social Search goes global. Available at: http://googlesocialweb.blogspot.com/2011/05/social-search-goes-global.html [Accessed 28 May 2012] Young, Rob D. 2011. Google Plus Reaches 25 Million Users, Activity Declines. Available at: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-plus-reaches-25-million-users-activitydeclines/31500/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Rampton, John. 2011. September 2011 Search Engine Market Share from comScore, Hitwise. Available at: http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2117170/September-2011-Search-EngineMarket-Share-from-comScore-Hitwise [Accessed 28 May 2012] Page, Larry. 2011. Google+. Available at: https://plus.google.com/106189723444098348646/posts/EanXz8fLwDh [Accessed 28 May 2012] Spiro, Rob. 2011. +1’s: the right recommendations right when you want them—in your search results. Available at: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/1s-right-recommendationsright-when-you.html [Accessed 28 May 2012] Morris, M., Teevan, J., Panovich, K. CHI 2010, April 10–15. What Do People Ask Their Social Networks, and Why?A Survey Study of Status Message Q&A Behaviour. Available at: http://people.csail.mit.edu/teevan/work/publications/papers/chi10-social.pdf [Accessed 28 May 2012] Ingram, Mathew. 2011. How social search is changing the search industry. Available at: http://pro.gigaom.com/2011/08/how-social-search-is-changing-the-searchindustry/?utm_source=tech&utm_medium=editorial&utm_campaign=intext&utm_term=3911 88+how-social-search-is-changing-the-search-industry-2&utm_content=mathewingram [Accessed 28 May 2012] Ingram, Mathew. 2011. Hey Google — being social is not an engineering problem. Available at: http://gigaom.com/2011/07/13/hey-google-being-social-is-not-an-engineering-problem/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Malik, Om. 2011. Why Google+ won’t hurt Facebook, but Skype will hate it. Available at: http://gigaom.com/2011/06/28/why-google-plus-wont-hurt-facebook-but-skype-will-hate-it/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Pierce, Dennis. 2011. New web-search formulas have huge implications for students and society. Available at: http://www.eschoolnews.com/2011/08/10/new-web-search-formulashave-huge-implications-for-students-and-society/? [Accessed 28 May 2012] Pariser, Eli. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Viking an imprint of Penguin Books, 2011.

57


Watters, Audrey. 2011. Will Google+ Replace Twitter or Facebook for Teachers? Available at: http://mindshift.kqed.org/2011/07/will-google-replace-twitter-or-facebook-for-teachers/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Powers, Patrick. 2011. A recipe ripe for success: why Google+ will work for Higher Education. Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2011/07/21/why-google-will-workfor-higher-ed/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Odell, Seth. 2011. What Google+ REALLY Means for Higher Ed. Available at: http://higheredlive.com/what-google-really-means-for-higher-ed/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Watters, Audrey. 2011. Google Plus Comes to Google Apps for (Higher) Education. Available at: http://www.hackeducation.com/2011/10/27/google-plus-comes-to-google-apps-for-highereducation/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Bughin, J., Corb, L., Manyika, J., Nottebohm, O., Chui, M., de Muller Barbat, B., Said, R. 2011. The impact of Internet technologies: Search. Available at: http://www.touchstonewebworks.com/images/use_of_vertical_search_engines.pdf [Accessed 28 May 2012] Alexander, Bryan. 2006. Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning? Available at: http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume41/Web20 ANewWaveofInnovationforTe/158042 [Accessed 28 May 2012] McGee, Matt. 2011. Google+ Public Posts Coming To Google’s Social Search Results. Available at: http://searchengineland.com/google-public-posts-coming-to-googles-social-search-results89333 [Accessed 28 May 2012] Pinola, Melanie. 2011. Google+ Posts Will Appear on Google Social Search Results. Available at: http://www.pcworld.com/article/238027/google_posts_will_appear_on_google_social_search _results.html [Accessed 28 May 2012] Scott, Piers Dillon. 2011. Google social search – what it is and how it works. Available at: http://sociable.co/web/google-social-search-what-it-is-and-how-it-works/ [Accessed 28 May 2012] Allen, Paul. 2011. Google+ Growth Accelerating. Passes 62 million users. Adding 625,000 new users per day. Prediction: 400 million users by end of 2012. Available at: https://plus.google.com/117388252776312694644/posts/ZcPA5ztMZaj [Accessed 28 May 2012]

58


Appendix B Google Plus social connections for Experiment 1 from Technology category Nr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Social connection URL https://plus.google.com/+Revision3/posts https://plus.google.com/101641620295650841734/posts https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts https://plus.google.com/+ChrisForesman/posts https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts https://plus.google.com/+TimOReilly/posts https://plus.google.com/118415244548299075322/posts https://plus.google.com/+verizon/posts https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts https://plus.google.com/112986485593729259515/posts https://plus.google.com/+ReadWriteWeb/posts https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts https://plus.google.com/+DaleDougherty/posts https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts https://plus.google.com/+MommyLovesTech/posts https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts https://plus.google.com/+mit/posts https://plus.google.com/+VeronicaBelmont/posts https://plus.google.com/+Engadget/posts https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts https://plus.google.com/+GuyKawasaki/posts https://plus.google.com/+ArsTechnica/posts https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts

59

Batch Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3

Category Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology


Appendix C Google Plus social connections for Experiment 1 from mixed non-Technology categories

Social connection URL

Nr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

https://plus.google.com/+JuicyCouture/posts https://plus.google.com/+BergdorfGoodman https://plus.google.com/+Modelinia/posts https://plus.google.com/+DailyFrontRow/posts https://plus.google.com/106324257583630087819/posts https://plus.google.com/+FreePeople/posts https://plus.google.com/+dvf/posts https://plus.google.com/+Shopbop/posts https://plus.google.com/+SeventeenMagazine/posts https://plus.google.com/+myhabit/posts https://plus.google.com/+FSUSeminoles/posts https://plus.google.com/+SportsIllustrated/posts https://plus.google.com/+Giants/posts https://plus.google.com/+Seahawks/posts https://plus.google.com/+TeamUSA/posts https://plus.google.com/+Klitschko/posts https://plus.google.com/+BleacherReport/posts https://plus.google.com/+CBSSportscom/posts https://plus.google.com/+WWE/posts https://plus.google.com/+NBAonESPN/posts https://plus.google.com/+ArtistsInThePlus/posts https://plus.google.com/+ArmadaMusic/posts https://plus.google.com/+DemiLovato/posts https://plus.google.com/+sonymusic/posts https://plus.google.com/+deadmau5/posts https://plus.google.com/+LadyGaga/posts https://plus.google.com/+SteveAoki/posts https://plus.google.com/+RedHotChiliPeppers/posts https://plus.google.com/116447218518656158381/posts https://plus.google.com/+50Cent/posts

60

Batch Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3

Category Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Fashion Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music


Appendix D Google Plus social connections for Experiment 2 Nr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Social connection URL https://plus.google.com/+Revision3/posts https://plus.google.com/101641620295650841734/posts https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts https://plus.google.com/+ChrisForesman/posts https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts https://plus.google.com/+ReadWriteWeb/posts https://plus.google.com/118415244548299075322/posts https://plus.google.com/+verizon/posts https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts https://plus.google.com/112986485593729259515/posts https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts https://plus.google.com/+DaleDougherty/posts https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts https://plus.google.com/+MommyLovesTech/posts https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts https://plus.google.com/+mit/posts https://plus.google.com/+VeronicaBelmont/posts https://plus.google.com/+Engadget/posts https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts https://plus.google.com/+GuyKawasaki/posts https://plus.google.com/+ArsTechnica/posts https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts https://plus.google.com/+FastCompany/posts https://plus.google.com/+BradleyHorowitz/posts https://plus.google.com/110014891370822989957/posts https://plus.google.com/+eff/posts https://plus.google.com/+RebeccaMacKinnon/posts https://plus.google.com/+NickBilton/posts https://plus.google.com/+AlirezaYavari/posts https://plus.google.com/+NixiePixel/posts https://plus.google.com/+WIRED/posts https://plus.google.com/+CNET/posts 61

Batch Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 3 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4 Batch 4

Category Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology


Appendix E Personal search results for Experiment 1 Module: Databases Social connections’ category: Technology Search term 1: database Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PS1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KgHv4RZ7TaK https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/6EBLXspQXcY https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/hnMMoaD5uvQ https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/iB52ZdkAp2q https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/UrtmtMeZA8E http://oreilly.com/catalog/docbook/book2/database.html http://oreilly.com/catalog/accessdata2/chapter/ch04.html http://oreilly.com/openbook/cgi/ch09_03.html http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/07/18/clustrix-the-leader-in-newsqldatabases/ http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/databases

Rank PS2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KgHv4RZ7TaK 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/6EBLXspQXcY 2 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/hnMMoaD5uvQ 3 https://plus.google.com/+ReadWriteWeb/posts/J259kgikvLr 4 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/iB52ZdkAp2q 5 http://oreilly.com/catalog/accessdata2/chapter/ch04.html 6 http://oreilly.com/openbook/cgi/ch09_03.html 7 http://oreilly.com/catalog/javadtabp/chapter/ch02.pdf 8 http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/07/18/clustrix-the-leader-in-newsqldatabases/ 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/databases 10 62


Rank PS3 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/9hBHXip1AL8 1 https://plus.google.com/+GuyKawasaki/posts/5kHwg4eFm5H 2 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/C4rk8rqr94d 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KgHv4RZ7TaK 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/6EBLXspQXcY 5 http://oreilly.com/catalog/accessdata2/chapter/ch04.html 6 http://oreilly.com/openbook/cgi/ch09_03.html 7 http://oreilly.com/catalog/javadtabp/chapter/ch02.pdf 8 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/cdo/resume.php 9 http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/07/18/clustrix-the-leader-in-newsqldatabases/ 10 Personal search results for Experiment 1 Module: Databases Social connections’ category: Fashion + Sports + Music Search term 2: database Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PS3 https://plus.google.com/+ArtistsInThePlus/posts/ekSNRfL1Jwx https://plus.google.com/+ArtistsInThePlus/posts/86EcXuHxx9A https://plus.google.com/+ArtistsInThePlus/posts/CwNZ2c13Sq6 no results no results no results no results no results no results no results

Note: No results for non-Technology Batches PS1 and PS2

63


Personal search results for Experiment 1 Module: System Specification Social connections’ category: Technology Search term 1: system specification Rank PS1 http://oreilly.com/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/eight-minute-xmltutorial.html 1 http://oreilly.com/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/ten-minute-xpathutorial.html 2 http://oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/stallman.html 3 http://searchengineland.com/buyers-guides/enterprise-social-media-managementsoftware-a-buyers-guide 4 http://oreilly.com/www/centers/gff/gff-faq/gff-faq3.htm 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 6 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/AXiEWavfajJ 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8ubNZRzd7ke 8 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/eFfHBhjr4Rq 9 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/akBy9NKu3zD 10

Rank PS2 http://oreilly.com/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/eight-minute-xmltutorial.html 1 http://oreilly.com/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/ten-minute-xpathutorial.html 2 http://oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/stallman.html 3 http://readwrite.com/2012/06/20/why-microsofts-surface-pro-will-be-the-first-realbusiness-tablet 4 http://oreilly.com/www/centers/gff/gff-faq/gff-faq3.htm 5 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/a16hjZ9JXW9 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 7 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/dMh3VFEns4W 8 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/AXiEWavfajJ 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8ubNZRzd7ke 10 64


Rank PS3 http://oreilly.com/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/eight-minute-xmltutorial.html 1 http://oreilly.com/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/ten-minute-xpathutorial.html 2 http://oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/stallman.html 3 http://readwrite.com/2012/06/20/why-microsofts-surface-pro-will-be-the-first-realbusiness-tablet 4 http://oreilly.com/www/centers/gff/gff-faq/gff-faq3.htm 5 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/a16hjZ9JXW9 6 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/MYUs8tw4wtV 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 8 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/JUDbYNoEzau 9 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/dMh3VFEns4W 10 Module: Information Architecture, Social connections’ category: Technology Search term 3: information architecture Rank PS1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SUFug7Y4xsy 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/AUcagscrCvz 2 http://oreilly.com/catalog/infotecture/chapter/ch02.html 3 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seoshould-know-45288 4 http://searchengineland.com/information-architects-are-from-venus-seos-are-frommars-35533 5 http://oreilly.com/catalog/infotecture2/chapter/ch08.pdf 6 http://searchengineland.com/how-website-structure-information-architectureshould-mirror-your-business-goals-128138 7 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 8 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 9 https://plus.google.com/+TimOReilly/posts/XrP6cfTyHm4 10 65


Rank PS2 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SUFug7Y4xsy 2 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/AUcagscrCvz 3 http://oreilly.com/catalog/infotecture/chapter/ch02.html 4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/infotecture2/chapter/ch08.pdf 5 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seoshould-know-45288 6 http://searchengineland.com/information-architects-are-from-venus-seos-are-frommars-35533 7 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 8 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 9 https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts/MV72VtMuPnX 10

Rank PS3 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SUFug7Y4xsy 2 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/AUcagscrCvz 3 http://oreilly.com/catalog/infotecture/chapter/ch02.html 4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/infotecture2/chapter/ch08.pdf 5 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seoshould-know-45288 6 http://searchengineland.com/information-architects-are-from-venus-seos-are-frommars-35533 7 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 8 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 9 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/ezLHkw9Vh9B 10

66


Appendix F Personal search results for Experiment 2: Batches PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4. Module: Database Search term 1: database Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/g3MySs4JwWL 2 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/24Eq7kDEKAZ 3 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/WyKqdX5p5tG 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KgHv4RZ7TaK 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/eMbEDLVVC5b 6 7 8 9

http://thehackernews.com/2012/09/oracle-database-stealthpassword.html http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/11/28/scalegrid-databasemanagement-for-public-and-private-cloud/ http://thehackernews.com/2012/11/imageshack-server-and-symantecdatabase.html http://thehackernews.com/search/label/leaked%20the%20database

http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/04/02/xeround-the-cloud10 database/

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/g3MySs4JwWL 2 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/24Eq7kDEKAZ 3 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/WyKqdX5p5tG 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KgHv4RZ7TaK 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/eMbEDLVVC5b http://thehackernews.com/2012/09/oracle-database-stealth6 password.html http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/11/28/scalegrid-database7 management-for-public-and-private-cloud/ http://thehackernews.com/2012/11/imageshack-server-and8 symantec-database.html 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/leaked%20the%20database http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/04/02/xeround-the-cloud10 database/

67


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/g3MySs4JwWL 2 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/9hBHXip1AL8 3 https://plus.google.com/+GuyKawasaki/posts/5kHwg4eFm5H 4 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/24Eq7kDEKAZ 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/WyKqdX5p5tG http://thehackernews.com/2012/09/oracle-database-stealth6 password.html http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/11/28/scalegrid-database7 management-for-public-and-private-cloud/ 8 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/alumni/job-board.php http://thehackernews.com/2012/11/imageshack-server-and-symantec9 database.html http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/11/google-spanner10 time/

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/g3MySs4JwWL 2 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/9hBHXip1AL8 3 https://plus.google.com/+WIRED/posts/FjJUB1WZeCC 4 https://plus.google.com/+GuyKawasaki/posts/5kHwg4eFm5H 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/24Eq7kDEKAZ 6 7 8 9 10

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/09/indias-gargantuan-biometricdatabase-raises-big-questions http://thehackernews.com/2012/09/oracle-database-stealthpassword.html https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/07/israels-biometric-databasedeemed-harmful-high-court-justices http://www.building43.com/videos/2012/11/28/scalegrid-databasemanagement-for-public-and-private-cloud/ https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-wins-protection-time-zonedatabase

68


Search term 2: SQL Data Manipulation Language Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2011/04/07/does-nosql-need-standardizatio 2 http://readwrite.com/2011/07/29/towards-a-sql-like-query-language 3 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Data%20Center%20Network%20Manager 4 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/patch 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/gvnciaXUB2R 6 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 7 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-11-01T11:38:008 07:00&max-results=6 9 http://readwrite.com/2011/08/12/from-big-data-to-nosql-the-rea-2 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/hacking%20news?updated-max=2012-1110 05T09:18:00-11:00&max-results=20&start=40&by-date=false

Rank PS2 1 http://readwrite.com/2011/04/07/does-nosql-need-standardizatio 2 http://readwrite.com/2011/07/29/towards-a-sql-like-query-language 3 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Data%20Center%20Network%20Manager 4 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/patch 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/09/building-data-science-teams.html 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/gvnciaXUB2R 7 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/what-is-data-science.html 10 http://readwrite.com/2011/08/12/from-big-data-to-nosql-the-rea-2

69


Rank PS3 1 http://readwrite.com/2011/04/07/does-nosql-need-standardizatio 2 http://readwrite.com/2011/07/29/towards-a-sql-like-query-language 3 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Data%20Center%20Network%20Manager 4 http://thehackernews.com/2012/10/cisco-patch-serious-vulnerability-in.html 5 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/patch 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/09/building-data-science-teams.html 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/gvnciaXUB2R 8 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/what-is-data-science.html

Rank PS4 1 http://readwrite.com/2011/04/07/does-nosql-need-standardizatio 2 http://readwrite.com/2011/07/29/towards-a-sql-like-query-language 3 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Data%20Center%20Network%20Manager 4 http://thehackernews.com/2012/10/cisco-patch-serious-vulnerability-in.html 5 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/patch 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/09/building-data-science-teams.html 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/gvnciaXUB2R 8 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/what-is-data-science.html

70


Search term 3: Conceptual Database Design Entity Relationship Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2009/02/12/is-the-relational-database-doomed http://thehackernews.com/search?q=iran&updated-max=2011-03-14T06:56:002 11:00&max-results=20&start=80&by-date=true http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Malware?updated-max=2012-033 29T10:25:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=100&by-date=false http://thehackernews.com/search/label/website%20hosting?updated-max=20114 09-16T12:44:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=35&by-date=false 5 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/database%20program http://readwrite.com/2012/05/16/google-goes-back-to-what-it-does-well-finding6 things 7 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Usa%20Hacker%20News http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Hacker%20News?updated-max=2012-078 22T06:40:00-11:00&max-results=20&start=140&by-date=false http://www.dannychoo.com/post/en/1671/Working+at+Amazon+and+Microsoft.ht 9 ml http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Hacker%20News?updated-max=2011-1210 31T05:00:00-08:00&max-results=20&start=619&by-date=false

Rank PS2 1 http://readwrite.com/2009/02/12/is-the-relational-database-doomed 2 http://searchengineland.com/google-launches-knowledge-graph-121585 3 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/database%20program 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/07/levels-of-the-game-the-hierarc.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/07/why-files-need-to-die.html 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/web2summit-radar-networks-unwi.html http://www.dannychoo.com/post/en/1671/Working+at+Amazon+and+Microsoft.ht 7 ml 8 http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/12/twitter-gold-mine.html http://readwrite.com/2012/05/16/google-goes-back-to-what-it-does-well-finding9 things 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Usa%20Hacker%20News

71


Rank PS3 1 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/research/profit/papers.html 2 http://readwrite.com/2009/02/12/is-the-relational-database-doomed 3 http://searchengineland.com/google-launches-knowledge-graph-121585 4 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/database%20program 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/07/levels-of-the-game-the-hierarc.html 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/07/why-files-need-to-die.html 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/web2summit-radar-networks-unwi.html 8 http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/12/twitter-gold-mine.html 9 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/TpXz4RwGFcD 10 https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts/hF3B4qLX4oj

Rank PS4 1 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/research/profit/papers.html 2 http://readwrite.com/2009/02/12/is-the-relational-database-doomed 3 http://searchengineland.com/google-launches-knowledge-graph-121585 4 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/database%20program 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/07/levels-of-the-game-the-hierarc.html 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/07/why-files-need-to-die.html 7 https://www.eff.org/files/FTCcommentsEFF.pdf 8 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/web2summit-radar-networks-unwi.html 9 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/TpXz4RwGFcD 10 https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts/hF3B4qLX4oj

72


Search term 4: SQL manipulation language database design XML Rank PS1 1 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 2 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-11-02T13:50:003 07:00&max-results=20&start=40&by-date=false 4 http://readwrite.com/ http://readwrite.com/2008/04/13/the_american_dream_17_years_of_software_e 5 ngineering 6 http://thehackernews.com/2012_10_01_archive.html 7 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/vulnerability%20assessment 8 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/bug%20tracking%20system http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Security%20News?updated-max=20129 04-24T04:43:00-11:00&max-results=20&start=220&by-date=false http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Security%20News?updated-max=201210 04-24T08:43:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=200&by-date=false

Rank PS2 1 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 2 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-11-02T13:50:003 07:00&max-results=20&start=40&by-date=false 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/what-is-data-science.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/questioning-functional-program.html 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/03/aspnet-on-a-roll.html 7 http://readwrite.com/ 8 http://thehackernews.com/2012_10_01_archive.html 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/vulnerability%20assessment 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/bug%20tracking%20system

73


Rank PS3 1 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 2 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-11-02T13:50:003 07:00&max-results=20&start=40&by-date=false 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/what-is-data-science.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/questioning-functional-program.html 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/03/aspnet-on-a-roll.html 7 http://readwrite.com/ 8 http://thehackernews.com/2012_10_01_archive.html 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/vulnerability%20assessment 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/bug%20tracking%20system

Rank PS4 1 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 2 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 3 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/what-is-data-science.html 4 http://thehackernews.com/2012_10_01_archive.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/questioning-functional-program.html 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/03/aspnet-on-a-roll.html 7 http://readwrite.com/ http://readwrite.com/2008/04/13/the_american_dream_17_years_of_software_e 8 ngineering https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/filenode/smartdust/20061017_smartdust.p 9 df 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/vulnerability%20assessment

74


Personal search results for Experiment 2: Batches PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4. Module: Web Applications

Search term 1: web application Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/7Cs5ttswSQT 2 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/dhYTbVLQvhW 3 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/f1G2m9cE5Fq 4 https://plus.google.com/+Revision3/posts/AQJkPjXiGEr 5 https://plus.google.com/+ReadWriteWeb/posts/9kWS71c3d2H http://toolsyard.thehackernews.com/2012/08/wappex-web-application6 exploiter.html 7 http://thehackernews.com/2012/10/how-to-minimize-web-application.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/2011/09/wavsep-103-web-application.html 9 http://readwrite.com/ 10 http://evernote.com/

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/7Cs5ttswSQT 2 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/dhYTbVLQvhW 3 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/ArP9azKgNEY 4 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/f1G2m9cE5Fq 5 https://plus.google.com/+Revision3/posts/AQJkPjXiGEr http://toolsyard.thehackernews.com/2012/08/wappex-web-application6 exploiter.html 7 http://thehackernews.com/2012/10/how-to-minimize-web-application.html 8 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/10/mobile-web-apps-webgl-apis.html http://marketingland.com/mobile-apps-vs-the-mobile-web-it-doesnt-matter-to9 consumers-8501 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/couchdb-couchapps-html5-mobile.html

75


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/7Cs5ttswSQT 2 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/dhYTbVLQvhW 3 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/ArP9azKgNEY 4 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/f1G2m9cE5Fq 5 https://plus.google.com/+Revision3/posts/AQJkPjXiGEr http://toolsyard.thehackernews.com/2012/08/wappex-web-application6 exploiter.html http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/making-web-applications-more-efficient7 0831.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/2012/10/how-to-minimize-web-application.html 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/10/mobile-web-apps-webgl-apis.html http://marketingland.com/mobile-apps-vs-the-mobile-web-it-doesnt-matter-to10 consumers-8501

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/7Cs5ttswSQT 2 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/dhYTbVLQvhW 3 https://plus.google.com/+CNET/posts/b1nb7YV7wbH 4 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/ArP9azKgNEY 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/f1G2m9cE5Fq http://toolsyard.thehackernews.com/2012/08/wappex-web-application6 exploiter.html http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/making-web-applications-more-efficient7 0831.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/2012/10/how-to-minimize-web-application.html 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/10/mobile-web-apps-webgl-apis.html http://marketingland.com/mobile-apps-vs-the-mobile-web-it-doesnt-matter-to10 consumers-8501

76


Search term 2: introduction to web applications development Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/FMHFochBb3X 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/eoq6drZ2BL4 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BKbJdCPscnL 4 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/ZcQB5NK5tSm 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/M8SApXJyedE 6 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 7 http://readwrite.com/2011/12/07/top_web_developer_tools_of_2011 8 http://readwrite.com/ 9 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/18/5_exciting_things_in_html_5 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/security

Rank PS2 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/time-to-learn-javascript.html 2 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/FMHFochBb3X 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/eoq6drZ2BL4 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BKbJdCPscnL 5 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 6 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/ZcQB5NK5tSm 7 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 8 http://readwrite.com/2011/12/07/top_web_developer_tools_of_2011 9 http://readwrite.com/ 10 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/18/5_exciting_things_in_html_5

77


Rank PS3 http://video.mit.edu/watch/web-apps-the-collision-of-design-and-business-with1 jared-spool-4011/ 2 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/time-to-learn-javascript.html 3 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/FMHFochBb3X 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/eoq6drZ2BL4 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BKbJdCPscnL 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 7 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/ZcQB5NK5tSm 8 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 9 http://readwrite.com/2011/12/07/top_web_developer_tools_of_2011 10 http://readwrite.com/

Rank PS4 http://video.mit.edu/watch/web-apps-the-collision-of-design-and-business-with1 jared-spool-4011/ 2 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/time-to-learn-javascript.html 3 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/FMHFochBb3X 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/eoq6drZ2BL4 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BKbJdCPscnL 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 7 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/ZcQB5NK5tSm 8 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 9 http://readwrite.com/2011/12/07/top_web_developer_tools_of_2011 10 http://readwrite.com/

78


Search term 3: server side scripting with PHP Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/bjg1VbgQwXx 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/fFfhbhkEi7v 3 https://plus.google.com/+NixiePixel/posts/1jGGQhEyFdP 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/eoq6drZ2BL4 5 https://plus.google.com/+NixiePixel/posts/VRDN9jrWFXu 6 http://www.php.net/ 7 http://readwrite.com/2009/12/17/server-side_javascript_back_with_a_vengeance 8 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 9 http://readwrite.com/2004/05/08/why_i_moved_fro 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Cross%20site%20scripting

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/G4uFwfvcNLM 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/bjg1VbgQwXx 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/fFfhbhkEi7v 4 https://plus.google.com/+NixiePixel/posts/1jGGQhEyFdP 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/eoq6drZ2BL4 6 http://www.php.net/ 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/node-javascript-success.html http://readwrite.com/2009/12/17/server8 side_javascript_back_with_a_vengeance 9 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/07/open-source-small-business-report.html

79


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/G4uFwfvcNLM 2 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/Pdd6vYe3UC7 3 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/Qncndfw1uKA 4 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/4yzUra3BC9T 5 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/bXUp369YJ8V 6 http://www.php.net/ 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/node-javascript-success.html http://readwrite.com/2009/12/17/server8 side_javascript_back_with_a_vengeance 9 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/07/open-source-small-business-report.html

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/G4uFwfvcNLM 2 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/Pdd6vYe3UC7 3 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/Qncndfw1uKA 4 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/4yzUra3BC9T 5 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/bXUp369YJ8V 6 http://www.php.net/ 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/node-javascript-success.html http://readwrite.com/2009/12/17/server8 side_javascript_back_with_a_vengeance 9 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/07/open-source-small-business-report.html

80


Search term 4: web application server side scripting with PHP SQL javascript Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/bjg1VbgQwXx 3 http://www.php.net/ 4 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Cross%20site%20scripting 5 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 6 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability http://readwrite.com/2009/12/17/server7 side_javascript_back_with_a_vengeance 8 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/website%20hacking 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/bug%20tracker 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/database%20applications

Rank PS2 1 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/bjg1VbgQwXx 3 http://www.php.net/ 4 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Cross%20site%20scripting 5 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 6 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/07/what-is-node.html http://readwrite.com/2009/12/17/server8 side_javascript_back_with_a_vengeance 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/website%20hacking 10 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/bug%20tracker

81


Rank PS3 1 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 2 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/bXUp369YJ8V 3 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/ZGHg69UH8Sw 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/bjg1VbgQwXx 5 http://www.php.net/ 6 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Cross%20site%20scripting 7 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/07/what-is-node.html 10 http://alltop.com/

Rank PS4 1 http://readwrite.com/2007/12/04/10_most_marketable_web_development_skills 2 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/bXUp369YJ8V 3 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/ZGHg69UH8Sw 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/bjg1VbgQwXx 5 http://www.php.net/ 6 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Cross%20site%20scripting 7 http://www.blackhat.com/usa/bh-us-12-briefings.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Vulnerability 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/07/what-is-node.html 10 http://alltop.com/

82


Personal search results for Experiment 2: Batches PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4. Module: Systems Specification

Search term 1: Systems Specification Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8ubNZRzd7ke 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 3 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/QmkKZLBv5b8 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8rYAvJPZvZM 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/WNWBBf7NqM4 http://devices.verizonwireless.com/content/innovationstore/en/devices/tagg6 -the-pet-tracker.html 7 http://readwrite.com/2010/06/17/socialtext-brings-the-twitter 8 http://www.sony.com/ http://readwrite.com/2012/05/08/top-10-windows-8-features-7-client-side9 hyper-v 10 http://readwrite.com/2012/01/03/first-signs-of-an-intel-window

Rank PS2 http://marketingland.com/5-ways-to-know-how-to-say-no-to-new-clients1 27287 2 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/dMh3VFEns4W 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8ubNZRzd7ke 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 5 https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts/di9qrTYxQNe 6 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/QmkKZLBv5b8 http://devices.verizonwireless.com/content/innovationstore/en/devices/tagg7 -the-pet-tracker.html http://searchengineland.com/buyers-guides/enterprise-social-media8 management-software-a-buyers-guide 9 http://readwrite.com/2010/06/17/socialtext-brings-the-twitter 10 http://www.sony.com/

83


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/cXoriH5NbG7 2 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/MYUs8tw4wtV 3 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/dMh3VFEns4W 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8ubNZRzd7ke 5 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/JUDbYNoEzau http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/30/alliance-for-wireless-power6 approves-its-specification/ 7 http://www.jetlev.com/#!/page_splash 8 http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/acer-c7-chromebook.html http://marketingland.com/5-ways-to-know-how-to-say-no-to-new-clients9 27287 http://devices.verizonwireless.com/content/innovationstore/en/devices/tagg10 -the-pet-tracker.html

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/cXoriH5NbG7 2 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/MYUs8tw4wtV 3 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/dMh3VFEns4W 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8ubNZRzd7ke 5 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/JUDbYNoEzau http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/30/alliance-for-wireless-power6 approves-its-specification/ http://reviews.cnet.com/tablets/barnes-noble-nook-hd/4505-3126_77 35472167.html 8 http://www.jetlev.com/ http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/acer-c79 chromebook.html http://marketingland.com/5-ways-to-know-how-to-say-no-to-new10 clients-27287

84


Search term 2: Activity Diagram Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/SY5oN1ooKba 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KYZBptEjD4e 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/Fy1yCCg4z7Y 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9FkrfXRrLmL 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/5iNDhkt8gP9 6 http://geekfor.me/faq/you-shouldnt-be-using-a-task-killer-with-android/ 7 http://readwrite.com/2010/06/28/how-to-connect-an-office-build 8 http://eyetap.blogspot.co.uk/ 9 http://readwrite.com/2009/01/29/whos_online_and_what_are_they_doing_there 10 http://readwrite.com/2012/09/18/inside-fords-silicon-valley-lab

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/SY5oN1ooKba 2 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/askNGLWojKf 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KYZBptEjD4e 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/Fy1yCCg4z7Y 5 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/QDjKtMSVkbx 6 http://geekfor.me/faq/you-shouldnt-be-using-a-task-killer-with-android/ http://searchengineland.com/introducing-the-periodic-table-of-seo-ranking7 factors-77181 8 http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1199154 9 http://readwrite.com/2010/06/28/how-to-connect-an-office-build 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/05/four-short-links-11-may-2009.html

85


Rank PS3 1 http://www.journalism.cuny.edu/members/drew-geraets/activity/ 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/SY5oN1ooKba 3 https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts/6b9mV3LmKaH 4 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/askNGLWojKf 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KYZBptEjD4e 6 https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts/Q3hcs3x3i6z 7 http://geekfor.me/faq/you-shouldnt-be-using-a-task-killer-with-android/ http://searchengineland.com/introducing-the-periodic-table-of-seo-ranking8 factors-77181 9 http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1199154 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/mba/program-components/personalized-curriculum/the10 core/?program/firstsem.php

Rank PS4 1 http://www.journalism.cuny.edu/members/drew-geraets/activity/ 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/SY5oN1ooKba 3 https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts/6b9mV3LmKaH 4 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/askNGLWojKf 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KYZBptEjD4e 6 https://plus.google.com/+myspacetom/posts/Q3hcs3x3i6z 7 http://geekfor.me/faq/you-shouldnt-be-using-a-task-killer-with-android/ http://searchengineland.com/introducing-the-periodic-table-of-seo-ranking8 factors-77181 9 http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1199154 https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/filenode/MySpace_Friend_Mapper_Article 10 _2007.pdf

86


Search term 3: Use Case Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2009/10/28/google_wave_use_cases_education http://readwrite.com/2012/08/10/when-and-where-will-windows-8-matter-for-pc2 and-tablet-users 3 http://readwrite.com/2010/04/12/whats_next_for_mobile_apps 4 https://twitter.com/lifehacker/status/4864979559 5 http://readwrite.com/2009/10/29/google_wave_use_cases_arts_filmmaking 6 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/NKqDfMzKLTk 7 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/B8fW7LoCRYA 8 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/DV8GuoxF9me 9 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/KQVjcN7AV8y 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/YR5UN1XygW1

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/2TwrC5SPMhz 2 http://geekbeat.tv/readycase-launches-multi-use-case-on-indiegogo/ 3 http://geekbeat.tv/readycase-launches-multi-use-case-on-indiegogo/stand/ 4 http://readwrite.com/2009/10/28/google_wave_use_cases_education 5 http://marketingland.com/8-great-ways-to-use-qr-codes-for-marketing-5650 http://searchengineland.com/making-the-case-for-adding-deep-content-to-large-e6 commerce-sites-140644 7 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/XHnMHAFFvJx 8 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/V7V6RagRoDZ 9 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/MNVKWy2FbCF 10 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SqNfyQKZu4J

87


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/EHtyrwPHwm6 2 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/2TwrC5SPMhz http://paidcontent.org/2012/11/12/google-presses-fair-use-case-in-book-scanning3 appeal/ 4 http://geekbeat.tv/readycase-launches-multi-use-case-on-indiegogo/ 5 http://geekbeat.tv/readycase-launches-multi-use-case-on-indiegogo/stand/ 6 http://readwrite.com/2009/10/28/google_wave_use_cases_education 7 http://marketingland.com/8-great-ways-to-use-qr-codes-for-marketing-5650 8 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/XHnMHAFFvJx 9 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/aNugh9xLTFr 10 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/V7V6RagRoDZ

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/EHtyrwPHwm6 2 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/2TwrC5SPMhz http://paidcontent.org/2012/11/12/google-presses-fair-use-case-in-book-scanning3 appeal/ 4 http://geekbeat.tv/readycase-launches-multi-use-case-on-indiegogo/ 5 https://www.eff.org/cases/lenz-v-universal 6 http://geekbeat.tv/readycase-launches-multi-use-case-on-indiegogo/stand/ 7 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/03/fair-use-win-righthaven-case 8 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/XHnMHAFFvJx 9 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/aNugh9xLTFr 10 https://plus.google.com/+CNET/posts/AVEdAvEUj4R

88


Search term 4: System Specification activity case Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8rYAvJPZvZM 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/22zacK3oyTQ 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/RJH3ZJKzKhQ 5 https://plus.google.com/+NixiePixel/posts/1My3aTfTiYX 6 http://eyetap.blogspot.co.uk/ http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/607691307/ubi-the-ubiquitous-computer7 voice-activated-and-al-0 8 http://www.apple.com/osx/ http://search.slashdot.org/story/12/09/06/1738235/google-patents-profit9 maximizing-dynamic-pricing 10 http://readwrite.com/2012/01/23/just-in-time-for-anonymous-att

Rank PS2 1 http://marketingland.com/hands-off-microsoft-surface-tablet-review-15146 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/8rYAvJPZvZM 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/22zacK3oyTQ 5 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BFcsHxUkb13 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/RJH3ZJKzKhQ 7 http://eyetap.blogspot.co.uk/ http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/607691307/ubi-the-ubiquitous-computer8 voice-activated-and-al-0 9 http://www.apple.com/osx/ http://search.slashdot.org/story/12/09/06/1738235/google-patents-profit10 maximizing-dynamic-pricing

89


Rank PS3 1 http://marketingland.com/hands-off-microsoft-surface-tablet-review-15146 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 3 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/CaxR4jpWMeQ 4 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/Bo8CkYbsBSG 5 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/JdrN8xdFx9B 6 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/BdUtkPVS8yF 7 http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/08/samsung-galaxy-note-ii-review/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/google-wants-new-249-arm-based8 chromebook-to-be-your-second-computer/ 9 http://eyetap.blogspot.co.uk/ http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/607691307/ubi-the-ubiquitous-computer10 voice-activated-and-al-0

Rank PS4 1 http://marketingland.com/hands-off-microsoft-surface-tablet-review-15146 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 3 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/CaxR4jpWMeQ 4 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/Bo8CkYbsBSG 5 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/JdrN8xdFx9B 6 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/BdUtkPVS8yF 7 http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/08/samsung-galaxy-note-ii-review/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/google-wants-new-249-arm-based8 chromebook-to-be-your-second-computer/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57394405-1/top-5-internal-drives-of-20129 your-system-deserves-a-worthy-upgrade/ 10 http://eyetap.blogspot.co.uk/

90


Personal search results for Experiment 2: Batches PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4. Module: E-Commerce

Search term 1: E-Commerce Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KqJEkVBvDcW 2 https://plus.google.com/+ReadWriteWeb/posts/ec2SwL2zASy 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GyRwWahUBMZ 4 http://readwrite.com/tag/e-commerce 5 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/E-commerce%20website 6 http://readwrite.com/tag/ecommerce-paas http://thehackernews.com/2010/11/ecommercearmoanet-hacked-by7 tunisian.html 8 http://thehackernews.com/2012/03/ecommerce-fraud-detection-tool-anti.html 9 https://plus.google.com/+ReadWriteWeb/posts/EaEqvskRTmo 10 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/25oMw7WauFT

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/hPazp2fujzr 2 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/LCiYXwuDt1C 3 https://plus.google.com/103218677032751327334/posts/BKbHpQsJF59 4 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/LenJLBLJtAM 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KqJEkVBvDcW http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/02/as-retail-e-commerce-sees-three-billion-dollar6 plus-days-in-the-past-week-online-holiday-sales-jump-15-percent-to-20-4b/ http://marketingland.com/cyber-monday-sees-biggest-e-commerce-haul-to-date7 1-46-billion-27400 http://searchengineland.com/e-commerce-seo-using-schema-org-just-got-a-lot8 more-granular-139236 http://searchengineland.com/google-drops-its-veil-at-times-reveals-ecommerce9 ambitions-131321 10 https://twitter.com/TechCrunch/status/275377795989901312

91


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/hPazp2fujzr 2 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/LCiYXwuDt1C 3 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/BKbHpQsJF59 4 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/UQQznf96sZv 5 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/LenJLBLJtAM 6 7 8 9 10

http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/02/as-retail-e-commerce-sees-three-billion-dollar-plusdays-in-the-past-week-online-holiday-sales-jump-15-percent-to-20-4b/ http://marketingland.com/cyber-monday-sees-biggest-e-commerce-haul-to-date-1-46billion-27400 http://searchengineland.com/e-commerce-seo-using-schema-org-just-got-a-lot-moregranular-139236 http://searchengineland.com/google-drops-its-veil-at-times-reveals-ecommerceambitions-131321 https://mitsloan.mit.edu/LearningEdge/strategy/EcommerceYunnan/Pages/default.aspx

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/hPazp2fujzr 2 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/LCiYXwuDt1C 3 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/BKbHpQsJF59 4 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/UQQznf96sZv 5 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/LenJLBLJtAM 6 7 8 9 10

http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/02/as-retail-e-commerce-sees-three-billion-dollarplus-days-in-the-past-week-online-holiday-sales-jump-15-percent-to-20-4b/ http://marketingland.com/cyber-monday-sees-biggest-e-commerce-haul-to-date1-46-billion-27400 http://searchengineland.com/e-commerce-seo-using-schema-org-just-got-a-lotmore-granular-139236 http://searchengineland.com/google-drops-its-veil-at-times-reveals-ecommerceambitions-131321 http://www.plusinteractive.com/

92


Search term 2: Web 2.0 Technologies Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2006/08/08/e-learning_20 2 http://readwrite.com/2009/08/11/gartner_hype_cycle_2009 3 http://readwrite.com/2011/09/26/web_20_map_adds_cities_of_data 4 http://readwrite.com/2005/12/19/cat_eats_pigeon 5 http://readwrite.com/2009/11/02/netvibes-goes-from-web-20-to-e 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7E161UjiLCg 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7zMeaUgnmsw 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/ETs9pvbk8LR 9 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/8QGHKRq4XQ1 10 https://plus.google.com/+NixiePixel/posts/Fwx1NJKMgmj

Rank PS2 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/07/government-20-web-20-risks-and.html 2 http://readwrite.com/2006/08/08/e-learning_20 3 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/top-10-lessons-for-gov-20-from.html 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/gov-20-goes-local.html 5 http://searchengineland.com/the-search-engine-unfriendliness-of-web-20-12465 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/e29kUeoQuEJ 7 https://plus.google.com/+CaliLewis/posts/GjadN6eTARF 8 https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts/44gsPvAm5a5 9 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/hQkejxH2A3f 10 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/STCCJjZFQtS

93


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/CUQduecSKhH 2 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/2vk35kU5Vqy 3 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/e29kUeoQuEJ 4 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/8b6vmUVCfu2 5 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/d9mYsCXT9fg 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/07/government-20-web-20-risks-and.html 7 http://readwrite.com/2006/08/08/e-learning_20 8 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/top-10-lessons-for-gov-20-from.html http://digiphile.wordpress.com/2010/02/08/on-language-government-2-0-jargon9 and-technology-gov20la/ 10 http://searchengineland.com/the-search-engine-unfriendliness-of-web-20-12465

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/CUQduecSKhH 2 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/2vk35kU5Vqy 3 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/e29kUeoQuEJ 4 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/8b6vmUVCfu2 5 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/d9mYsCXT9fg 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/07/government-20-web-20-risks-and.html 7 http://readwrite.com/2006/08/08/e-learning_20 8 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/top-10-lessons-for-gov-20-from.html http://digiphile.wordpress.com/2010/02/08/on-language-government-2-0-jargon9 and-technology-gov20la/ 10 http://searchengineland.com/the-search-engine-unfriendliness-of-web-20-12465

94


Search term 3: Building E-Commerce Website Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2011/02/28/building-an-e-commerce-app-mad http://readwrite.com/2012/06/07/opensky-is-pinterest-for-shopping-but-wait2 theres-more-frictionless-sharing 3 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/11/current_e-commerce_trends 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KqJEkVBvDcW 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GyRwWahUBMZ 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dCrkXQyykex 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/Uk86cGjYW9f 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/4PDjPw7Jz3e http://allthingsd.com/20121011/the-next-blue-nile-ritani-launches-jewelry-site9 with-a-bricks-and-mortar-twist/ http://readwrite.com/2009/11/22/e-commerce_top_internet_trends_of_200010 2009

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/hPazp2fujzr http://searchengineland.com/video-content-for-ecommerce-sites-improved2 search-results-increased-sales-129314 3 http://searchengineland.com/content-ideas-for-an-ecommerce-site-124386 http://searchengineland.com/e-commerce-seo-using-schema-org-just-got-a-lot4 more-granular-139236 5 http://readwrite.com/2011/02/28/building-an-e-commerce-app-mad http://marketingland.com/blogging-for-ecommerce-driving-revenue-and-traffic6 21241 7 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/Ec8aySYD9PK 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KqJEkVBvDcW 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GyRwWahUBMZ 10 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/ffDe2FpoK3x

95


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/hPazp2fujzr http://searchengineland.com/video-content-for-ecommerce-sites-improved2 search-results-increased-sales-129314 3 http://searchengineland.com/content-ideas-for-an-ecommerce-site-124386 http://searchengineland.com/e-commerce-seo-using-schema-org-just-got-a-lot4 more-granular-139236 5 http://readwrite.com/2011/02/28/building-an-e-commerce-app-mad http://marketingland.com/blogging-for-ecommerce-driving-revenue-and-traffic6 21241 7 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/Fwa9veRAxw9 8 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/Ec8aySYD9PK 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KqJEkVBvDcW 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GyRwWahUBMZ

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/hPazp2fujzr http://searchengineland.com/video-content-for-ecommerce-sites-improved2 search-results-increased-sales-129314 3 http://searchengineland.com/content-ideas-for-an-ecommerce-site-124386 http://searchengineland.com/e-commerce-seo-using-schema-org-just-got-a-lot4 more-granular-139236 5 http://www.plusinteractive.com/ http://marketingland.com/blogging-for-ecommerce-driving-revenue-and-traffic6 21241 7 https://plus.google.com/114753028665775786510/posts/Fwa9veRAxw9 8 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/Ec8aySYD9PK 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/KqJEkVBvDcW 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GyRwWahUBMZ

96


Search term 4: E-Commerce website Web 2.0 business Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2007/01/24/amazon_tags_ajax_plogs_wikis 2 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/11/current_e-commerce_trends 3 http://readwrite.com/ 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/FTydYFGhGNR 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dgWWcQw7VwT 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/JXKiXvuTP5f 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/fHSBYrfwy9e 8 http://www.nbcnews.com/ http://readwrite.com/2012/08/21/how-ebay-turned-around-a-dying-business9 secret-word-mobile 10 http://readwrite.com/2004/12/30/best_web_20_com

Rank PS2 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/top-10-lessons-for-gov-20-from.html 2 http://readwrite.com/2007/01/24/amazon_tags_ajax_plogs_wikis 3 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/11/current_e-commerce_trends http://searchengineland.com/why-you-should-get-involved-with-social-shopping-e4 commerce-20-22995 5 http://searchengineland.com/linking-in-the-world-of-web-20-11029 6 https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts/44gsPvAm5a5 7 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/27TYADjnZYz 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/FTydYFGhGNR 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dgWWcQw7VwT 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/JXKiXvuTP5f

97


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts/44gsPvAm5a5 2 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/27TYADjnZYz 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/FTydYFGhGNR 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dgWWcQw7VwT 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/JXKiXvuTP5f 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/top-10-lessons-for-gov-20-from.html 7 http://readwrite.com/2007/01/24/amazon_tags_ajax_plogs_wikis https://mitsloan.mit.edu/LearningEdge/CaseDocs/088 076%20Ecommerce%20at%20Yunnan%20Lucky%20Air%20-%20Lehrich.pdf 9 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/11/current_e-commerce_trends http://searchengineland.com/why-you-should-get-involved-with-social-shopping-e10 commerce-20-22995

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+SergeyBrin/posts/44gsPvAm5a5 2 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/27TYADjnZYz 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/FTydYFGhGNR 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dgWWcQw7VwT 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/JXKiXvuTP5f 6 http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/10/top-10-lessons-for-gov-20-from.html 7 http://readwrite.com/2007/01/24/amazon_tags_ajax_plogs_wikis https://mitsloan.mit.edu/LearningEdge/CaseDocs/088 076%20Ecommerce%20at%20Yunnan%20Lucky%20Air%20-%20Lehrich.pdf 9 http://readwrite.com/2008/12/11/current_e-commerce_trends http://searchengineland.com/why-you-should-get-involved-with-social-shopping-e10 commerce-20-22995

98


Personal search results for Experiment 2: Batches PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4. Module: Information and Knowledge Management

Search term 1: Information and Knowledge Management Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2004/02/20/information_flo 2 http://readwrite.com/2004/06/24/knowledge_manag_1 3 http://training.thehackernews.com/Certified-Cyber-Security-Ninja.html 4 http://readwrite.com/tag/knowledge-management 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dZwZjEvCkcF 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GsLtYLeoJx6 7 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/KEMSRckBCGY 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/YjMrPQD3MkM 9 https://plus.google.com/+RosaGolijan/posts/gWsd48AgDyx http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/05/digital-archivists10 technological-custodians-of-human-history/

Rank PS2 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/03/knowledge-management-social-media.html 2 http://readwrite.com/2004/02/20/information_flo 3 http://readwrite.com/2004/06/24/knowledge_manag_1 4 http://readwrite.com/tag/knowledge-management 5 http://training.thehackernews.com/Certified-Cyber-Security-Ninja.html 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dZwZjEvCkcF 7 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 8 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/MKozevXzrvk 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/GsLtYLeoJx6 10 https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts/RaRyBr5Av9N

99


Rank PS3 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/03/knowledge-management-social-media.html 2 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=41335 3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=22672 4 http://readwrite.com/2004/02/20/information_flo 5 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=41395 6 https://plus.google.com/+VeronicaBelmont/posts/Eju6FKW6GjC 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dZwZjEvCkcF 8 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/3zPurPEJR4f 9 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 10 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/1qXGvddoz37

Rank PS4 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/03/knowledge-management-social-media.html 2 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=41335 3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=22672 4 http://readwrite.com/2004/02/20/information_flo 5 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=41395 6 https://plus.google.com/+VeronicaBelmont/posts/Eju6FKW6GjC 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dZwZjEvCkcF 8 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/3zPurPEJR4f 9 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 10 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/1qXGvddoz37

100


Search term 2: Information economics Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2007/03/01/attention_economy_overview 2 http://readwrite.com/2008/10/22/health_20_economics_of_aggregation 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BKwDFRxJYqT 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/SurVRRvCQFB 5 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/Mu8YWykMJRm 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/2jeKu3EABiR 7 http://techcrunch.com/2011/11/15/technology-destroying-jobs/ http://readwrite.com/2012/05/23/how-online-retailers-use-an-age-old-economic8 theory-to-boost-sales 9 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/trend%20mirco http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Hacker%20News?updated-max=2012-0810 21T02:09:00-07:00&max-results=10&start=90&by-date=false

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts/eMshWVJ4StY 2 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/bsJNA8hjGgE 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BKwDFRxJYqT 4 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/9gNX5F474NJ 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/SurVRRvCQFB 6 http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2012/09/picosatellites 7 http://readwrite.com/2007/03/01/attention_economy_overview 8 http://marketingland.com/ceo-resume-flap-brings-more-disarray-at-yahoo-11279 9 http://readwrite.com/2008/10/22/health_20_economics_of_aggregation 10 http://www.planetaryresources.com/

101


Rank PS3 1 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=22672 2 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/fNC7xG2UdZY 3 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/dJGowyQGT9A 4 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/1uwNFQKJ7ra 5 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/Tzgj8No69tR 6 https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts/eMshWVJ4StY 7 http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2012/09/picosatellites 8 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/directory.php?grouping=group http://shass.mit.edu/news/news-2012-three-mit-economics-phd-students9 selected-among-worlds-most-promising http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21566697-america-may-not10 want-what-its-caribbean-outpost-now-does-51st-state

Rank PS4 1 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=22672 2 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/fNC7xG2UdZY 3 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/dJGowyQGT9A 4 https://plus.google.com/+eff/posts/DjdWjiueYYq 5 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/1uwNFQKJ7ra 6 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/Tzgj8No69tR 7 http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2012/09/picosatellites 8 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/directory.php?grouping=group 9 http://www.economist.com/node/21562247 10 http://www.economist.com/node/21559331

102


Search term 3: Managing information organisation Rank PS1 1 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Secunia 2 http://readwrite.com/2004/02/20/information_flo http://readwrite.com/2012/08/23/what-every-organization-needs-to-know-about3 the-changing-face-of-software-development 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9ojqA9VZeMg 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/ZCVQ5q4Crvj 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/BiytzM9ip5W 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PDUm2JVdim1 9 http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/2012/03/the-magic-of-doing-one-thing-a.html 10 http://readwrite.com/2011/08/16/choosing-the-right-social-medi

Rank PS2 1 http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Secunia 2 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/03/knowledge-management-social-media.html 3 http://readwrite.com/2004/02/20/information_flo 4 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BRduAhu1hA2 5 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/D6wLbAmiefC 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/5P1g8j26pDc 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9ojqA9VZeMg 8 https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts/UPUXkGAvVpt 9 http://investor.google.com/corporate/2012/ceo-letter.html http://searchengineland.com/seo-smackdown-information-architecture-vs10 technical-architecture-91419

103


Rank PS3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Information%20technology 1 %20for%20management 2 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Leadership 3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Computer 4 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/dPPc4KC315a 5 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/CqaHfG9mGAm 6 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BRduAhu1hA2 7 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/D6wLbAmiefC 8 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/5P1g8j26pDc 9 http://africannewschallenge.org/meet-the-finalists/ 10 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/faculty.html

Rank PS4 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Information%20technology 1 %20for%20management 2 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Leadership 3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Computer 4 https://plus.google.com/+AmandaBlain/posts/dPPc4KC315a 5 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/CqaHfG9mGAm 6 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BRduAhu1hA2 7 https://plus.google.com/+TechCrunch/posts/D6wLbAmiefC 8 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/5P1g8j26pDc 9 http://africannewschallenge.org/meet-the-finalists/ 10 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/faculty.html

104


Search term 4: Information and Knowledge Management economics organisation overload Rank PS1 http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-04-21T14:09:001 07:00&max-results=20&reverse-paginate=true http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Hacker%20News?updated-max=2012-042 21T14:09:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=260&by-date=false http://readwrite.com/2009/02/09/12_companies_targeting_tech_early_adopters_ 3 9feb09 4 http://readwrite.com/2009/02/12/12_companies_sponsors_16feb09 5 http://readwrite.com/ http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-10-24T06:57:006 07:00&max-results=20&reverse-paginate=true http://thehackernews.com/search/label/hacking%20news?updated-max=2012-107 21T07:00:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=80&by-date=false http://thehackernews.com/search?q=lulzsec&updated-max=2011-07-20T05:51:008 07:00&max-results=20&start=60&by-date=false http://thehackernews.com/search/label/Malware?updated-max=2011-029 09T05:45:00-08:00&max-results=20&start=284&by-date=false http://readwrite.com/2008/07/23/iorg_discusses_solutions_for_i#feed=/search?k eyword=Information and Knowledge Management economics organisation 10 overload

Rank PS2 1 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/management 2 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/the-social-network-operating-s.html http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-04-21T14:09:003 07:00&max-results=20&reverse-paginate=true http://readwrite.com/2009/02/09/12_companies_targeting_tech_early_adopters_ 4 9feb09 5 http://readwrite.com/ http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-10-24T06:57:006 07:00&max-results=20&reverse-paginate=true http://thehackernews.com/search/label/hacking%20news?updated-max=2012-107 21T07:00:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=80&by-date=false http://thehackernews.com/search?q=lulzsec&updated-max=2011-07-20T05:51:008 07:00&max-results=20&start=60&by-date=false 9 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BH88qmany2R 10 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/12aVWvcGWZg

105


Rank PS3 1 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=corporate 2 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/pdf/cv/Brynjolfsson%20vita%202010-02-05.pdf 3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Sustainability 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/management 5 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/video-archive.php 6 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BH88qmany2R 7 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/12aVWvcGWZg 8 http://buzzmachine.com/tag/networks/ 9 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/the-social-network-operating-s.html 10 http://www.vortex.com/privacy/priv.09.07

Rank PS4 1 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=corporate 2 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/pdf/cv/Brynjolfsson%20vita%202010-02-05.pdf 3 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/expertiseguide/search.html?t=Sustainability 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/management 5 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/video-archive.php 6 https://www.eff.org/effector/4/2 7 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/BH88qmany2R 8 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/12aVWvcGWZg 9 http://buzzmachine.com/tag/networks/ 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2007/10/the-social-network-operating-s.html

106


Personal search results for Experiment 2: Batches PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4. Module: Information Architecture Search term 1: Information Architecture Rank PS1 1 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 2 http://ekallevig.com/uploads/erik-kallevig-resume.pdf 3 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 4 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/XHEeLiR49vi 5 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/4C2DXeq8jyg 6 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/F1VG6K6eUVg http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/a-new-google-app-gives-you-local7 information-before-you-ask-for-it/ 8 http://usa.autodesk.com/ 9 http://readwrite.com/2007/09/11/social_graph_concepts_and_issues 10 http://readwrite.com/2010/05/24/fluiddb-backing

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SUFug7Y4xsy 2 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/AUcagscrCvz 3 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo4 should-know-45288 5 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 http://searchengineland.com/information-architects-are-from-venus-seos-are6 from-mars-35533 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/information-architecture http://searchengineland.com/how-website-structure-information-architecture8 should-mirror-your-business-goals-128138 9 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 10 https://plus.google.com/+TheHackerNews/posts/XHEeLiR49vi

107


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SUFug7Y4xsy 2 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/AUcagscrCvz 3 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo4 should-know-45288 5 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 http://searchengineland.com/information-architects-are-from-venus-seos-are6 from-mars-35533 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/information-architecture http://searchengineland.com/how-website-structure-information-architecture8 should-mirror-your-business-goals-128138 9 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 10 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/ezLHkw9Vh9B

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/SUFug7Y4xsy 2 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/AUcagscrCvz 3 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/i3EWgQ97cV9 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo4 should-know-45288 5 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 http://searchengineland.com/information-architects-are-from-venus-seos-are6 from-mars-35533 7 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/information-architecture http://searchengineland.com/how-website-structure-information-architecture8 should-mirror-your-business-goals-128138 9 https://plus.google.com/+KeithBarrett/posts/6u4Di81J62T 10 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/ezLHkw9Vh9B

108


Search term 2: Organisational Systems Navigation Rank PS1 http://readwrite.com/2012/12/05/want-to-win-a-microsoft-imagine-cup-grant1 combine-devices-sensors-and-the-cloud 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 3 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/B3Ax3UmKcLg 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/G89ySQv6ird 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PDUm2JVdim1 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron 8 http://www.gallup.com/poll/157589/distrust-media-hits-new-high.aspx 9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kgbarrett http://readwrite.com/2012/11/09/happy-8th-birthday-firefox-can-mozilla-adapt10 to-the-mobile-era

Rank PS2 1 http://searchengineland.com/bing-search-quality-rating-guidelines-130592 2 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/09/building-data-science-teams.html http://readwrite.com/2012/12/05/want-to-win-a-microsoft-imagine-cup-grant3 combine-devices-sensors-and-the-cloud 4 http://searchengineland.com/after-apple-apology-what-next-for-ios-maps-134797 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 7 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/YnaxFZ43yxB 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/B3Ax3UmKcLg 9 https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts/816GJBwhEm7 10 http://investor.google.com/corporate/2012/ceo-letter.html

109


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/X1SWCL2mmzE 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 3 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/XUEeKZ7aZ3A 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 5 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/YnaxFZ43yxB http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its6 maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ 7 http://www.weather.gov/ 8 http://searchengineland.com/bing-search-quality-rating-guidelines-130592 9 http://mitsloan.mit.edu/actionlearning/labs/l-lab-faculty.php 10 http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/09/building-data-science-teams.html

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/X1SWCL2mmzE 2 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 3 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/XUEeKZ7aZ3A 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 5 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/YnaxFZ43yxB 6 http://www.gnu.org/ 7 http://www.fastcompany.com/3001734/secrets-generation-flux http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its8 maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/ 9 http://www.weather.gov/ 10 http://searchengineland.com/bing-search-quality-rating-guidelines-130592

110


Search term 3: Findability Search Rank PS1 1 http://readwrite.com/2008/02/13/the_future_of_search_defined_examples 2 http://readwrite.com/2007/05/07/top_17_search_innovations http://readwrite.com/2010/01/25/4_tech_trends_you_must_understand_to_be_a 3 n_effecti 4 http://readwrite.com/2009/12/13/content_farms_impact 5 http://readwrite.com/2011/05/27/optimize-your-web-content-for-search-social 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dZwZjEvCkcF 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/Gs31hgPtPpq 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PZrpGy796t2 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/7nBtp27eosL 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/N394yiCBQqk

Rank PS2 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/A1a3iEcHm1n 2 http://searchengineland.com/findability-seo-and-the-searcher-experience-61038 http://searchengineland.com/how-to-engage-the-zmot-to-be-findable-relevant3 trustworthy-131223 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/04/practical-tips-for-government.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/findability 6 http://readwrite.com/2008/02/13/the_future_of_search_defined_examples 7 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/LenJLBLJtAM 8 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/KyhnFEuS8iF 9 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/Xb6iUEQrj7E 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/dZwZjEvCkcF

111


Rank PS3 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/A1a3iEcHm1n 2 http://searchengineland.com/findability-seo-and-the-searcher-experience-61038 http://searchengineland.com/how-to-engage-the-zmot-to-be-findable-relevant3 trustworthy-131223 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/04/practical-tips-for-government.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/findability 6 http://readwrite.com/2008/02/13/the_future_of_search_defined_examples 7 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/LenJLBLJtAM 8 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/KyhnFEuS8iF 9 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/Xb6iUEQrj7E 10 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/8ZEpz3ZZzuk

Rank PS4 1 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/A1a3iEcHm1n 2 http://searchengineland.com/findability-seo-and-the-searcher-experience-61038 http://searchengineland.com/how-to-engage-the-zmot-to-be-findable-relevant3 trustworthy-131223 4 http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/04/practical-tips-for-government.html 5 http://radar.oreilly.com/tag/findability 6 http://readwrite.com/2008/02/13/the_future_of_search_defined_examples 7 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/LenJLBLJtAM 8 https://plus.google.com/+SearchEngineLand/posts/KyhnFEuS8iF 9 https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/Xb6iUEQrj7E 10 https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/8ZEpz3ZZzuk

112


Search term 4: Information Architecture Search Navigation Rank PS1 http://thehackernews.com/search?q=android&updated-max=2011-081 16T21:50:00-07:00&max-results=20&start=100&by-date=true http://thehackernews.com/search?updated-max=2012-03-05T21:28:002 08:00&max-results=20&reverse-paginate=true 3 https://profiles.google.com/111091089527727420853/buzz/cNZpLTZvZPY 4 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 5 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PH6Mqiz5NUq 6 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/UEfRYFf6xRK 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/YQHMoD6EJYh 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/G89ySQv6ird 10 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/4y89vQ4R4oP

Rank PS2 http://searchengineland.com/site-navigation-information-architecture1 fundamentals-for-seos-46368 2 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo3 should-know-45288 http://searchengineland.com/seo-smackdown-information-architecture-vs4 technical-architecture-91419 http://searchengineland.com/when-good-seo-becomes-bad-information5 architecture-47373 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PH6Mqiz5NUq 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 10 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/6KmcpaRdJjK

113


Rank PS3 http://searchengineland.com/site-navigation-information-architecture1 fundamentals-for-seos-46368 2 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo3 should-know-45288 http://searchengineland.com/seo-smackdown-information-architecture-vs4 technical-architecture-91419 http://searchengineland.com/when-good-seo-becomes-bad-information5 architecture-47373 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PH6Mqiz5NUq 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 10 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/ANeFfzMBKuS

Rank PS4 http://searchengineland.com/site-navigation-information-architecture1 fundamentals-for-seos-46368 2 http://searchengineland.com/3-seo-myths-about-information-architecture-68405 http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo3 should-know-45288 http://searchengineland.com/seo-smackdown-information-architecture-vs4 technical-architecture-91419 http://searchengineland.com/when-good-seo-becomes-bad-information5 architecture-47373 6 https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/fhN4eUf47Vr 7 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/hS2TBNNpSZG 8 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/PH6Mqiz5NUq 9 https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/9SpnpHPQhJm 10 https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/ANeFfzMBKuS

114


Appendix G Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation of top ten results in relation to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2 Module: Databases Search term 1: database PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

2

4

4

2

2

5

5

2

2

3

3

3

3

5

5

3

4

3

4

4

2

4

4

2

5

4

5

5

3

5

5

3

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

2 6

8

7

60.0%

40.0%

1

1

2 6

8

4

6

6

7

7

7

9

9

8

6

5 7

7

7

6

9

9

9

7 8

7

9

10 60.0%

PS3

40.0%

60.0%

PS1

100.0%

100.0%

60.0%

40.0%

PS2

100.0%

100.0%

60.0%

40.0%

PS3

60.0%

60.0%

100.0%

60.0%

PS4

40.0%

40.0%

60.0%

100.0%

PS2

5

9

PS2

PS1

3

6

7

Overlapping PS1

Correlation

4

PS3

PS4

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

115

60.0%

100.0%

10 60.0%

40.0%

40.0%

60.0%

100.0%


Search term 2: SQL Data Manipulation Language PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

4

4

5

5

4

4

6

5

4

4

7

6

5

5

7

6

5

5

7

6

5

5

8

7

6

6

8

7

6

6

8

7

6

6

9

8

7

7

9

8

7

7

8

7

7

9

8

8

9

8

8

9

8

8

10

9

9

10

9

9

10

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

5

4

4

6

5

7

6

5

5

8

7

6

6

7

7

9 10

9

100.0%

80.0%

70.0%

70.0%

Overlapping PS1

10 80.0%

PS2

PS3

70.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

80.0%

70.0%

70.0%

PS2

80.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

PS3

70.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

70.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS3

PS4

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

116

90.0%

70.0%

90.0%


Search term 3: Conceptual Database Design Entity Relationship PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

2 3

1 1

1

1

5

4

5

5

2

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

2

3

2

2

3

2

2

3

2

2

4

3

3

4

3

3

4

3

3

5

4

4

5

4

4

6

5

5

6

5

5

7

6

6

8

6

6

8

7

5

3

5

4

4

6

9

6

5

5

10

7

6

8

8

7

9

8 9

6

10

7

100.0%

50.0%

7 20.0%

20.0%

Overlapping PS1

50.0%

7 7

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

10

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

100.0%

70.0%

PS3

6

8

60.0%

20.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

50.0%

20.0%

20.0%

PS2

50.0%

100.0%

70.0%

60.0%

PS3

20.0%

70.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

20.0%

60.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Correlation

PS1

PS2

4

8

100.0%

PS2

4

2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

0.7

1

1

PS2

0.7

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

117

70.0%

8

20.0%

60.0%


Search term 4: SQL manipulation language database design XML PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

3

3

3

4

7

4

4

8

7

4

4

8

7

3

3

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

8

5

5

5

8

6

6

6

8

6

6

6

4

6

6

6

7

9

7

7

7

10

7

7

7

10

8

8

4

4

8

9

9

10

10

10

10

9

100.0%

100.0%

80.0%

4

6

5 6 7

4

4

4

9

7

7

8

6

6

5

10

8

8

9

7

7

9

9

10

8

8

7

10

10

9

100.0%

70.0%

70.0%

60.0%

100.0%

100.0%

80.0%

Overlapping PS1

70.0%

PS2

PS3

70.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

70.0%

70.0%

60.0%

PS2

70.0%

100.0%

100.0%

80.0%

PS3

70.0%

100.0%

100.0%

80.0%

PS4

60.0%

80.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

0.8

PS2

1

1

1

0.8

PS3

1

1

1

0.8

PS4

0.8

0.8

0.8

1

118

3

9 10

60.0%

80.0%

80.0%

100.0%


Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation of top ten results in relation to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2 Module: Web Applications Search term 1: web application PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

4

3

3

4

3

3

5

4

4

3

5

4

4

3

5

4

4

3

5

5

4

5

5

4

5

5

4

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

8

8

7

7

8

8

7

7 8

3 4

3

3

5

4

4

3

6

6

6

6

7

7

8

8

7

7

9

8

8

9

8

9

9

8

8

10

9

9

10

9

9

10

10

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

7

60.0%

7

5

60.0%

50.0%

Overlapping PS1

60.0%

PS2

PS3

60.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

60.0%

60.0%

50.0%

PS2

60.0%

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

PS3

60.0%

90.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

50.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

119

90.0%

50.0%

80.0%


Search term 2: introduction to web applications development PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

2

1

3

2

1

1

3

2

1

1

3

2

1

1

4

3

2

2

4

3

2

2

1

4

3

2

2

5

4

3

3

5

4

3

3

2

2

6

4

3

3

7

5

4

4

7

5

4

4

3

3

5

4

4

6

5

5

6

5

5

7

6

5

5

8

7

6

6

8

7

6

6

2

1

3

2

1

4

3

5 6

4

7

6

4

4

8

7

6

6

9

8

7

7

9

8

7

7

8

7

6

6

9

8

7

7

10

9

8

8

10

9

8

8

9

8

7

7

10

9

8

8

10

9

9

10

9

9

10

9

8

8

10

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

80.0%

70.0%

70.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Overlapping PS1

80.0%

PS2

PS3

70.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

80.0%

70.0%

70.0%

PS2

80.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

PS3

70.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

70.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS3

PS4

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

120

90.0%

70.0%

90.0%


Search term 3: server side scripting with PHP PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

4

3

3

3

3

3

4

3

5

4

4

4

4

4

5

4

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

7 8

7

7

7

9

8

8

8

70.0%

30.0%

30.0%

Overlapping PS1

1

1

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

8

7

7

7

8

7

7

7

8

7

7

7

9

8

8

8

9

8

8

8

9

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

100.0%

60.0%

60.0%

60.0%

100.0%

100.0%

60.0%

100.0%

100.0%

70.0%

PS2

PS3

30.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

70.0%

30.0%

30.0%

PS2

70.0%

100.0%

60.0%

60.0%

PS3

30.0%

60.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

30.0%

60.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS3

PS4

Correlation

PS1

1

6

10 100.0%

1

PS2

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

121

30.0%


Search term 4: web application server side scripting with PHP SQL javascript PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

4

4

2

2

4

4

2

2

3

3

3

3

5

5

3

3

5

5

3

3

4

4

2

2

4

4

2

2

6

6

4

4

6

6

4

4

5

5

3

3

5

5

3

3

7

7

5

5

7

7

5

5

6

6

4

4

6

6

4

4

8

8

6

6

8

8

6

6

5

5

8

7

5

5

9

7

7

9

7

7

6

6

9

8

6

6

8

8

8

8

10

9

7

7

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

7 8

7

9

8

10

9

100.0%

90.0%

1

1

1

1

10 60.0%

60.0%

Overlapping PS1

90.0%

100.0%

PS2

70.0%

PS3

70.0%

60.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

90.0%

60.0%

60.0%

PS2

90.0%

100.0%

70.0%

70.0%

PS3

60.0%

70.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

60.0%

70.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS3

PS4

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

122

70.0%

60.0%

70.0%


Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation of top ten results in relation to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2 Module: Systems Specification Search term 1: Systems Specification PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

3

1

2

4

2

6

3

2

2

4

3

3

3

1

4

2

1

1

5

4

9

1

1

10

1

1

3

2

2

3

2

2

4

3

3

4

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

5

6

3

7

6

7

6

9

7

10

8

8 9

7

10

8

6

100.0%

60.0%

20.0%

10.0%

Overlapping PS1

60.0%

10 10 1

10

7

1

100.0%

40.0%

30.0%

PS3

20.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

60.0%

20.0%

10.0%

PS2

60.0%

100.0%

40.0%

30.0%

PS3

20.0%

40.0%

100.0%

80.0%

PS4

10.0%

30.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

7

7

8

9

PS2

4

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

0.4

-0.5

PS3

1

0.4

1

1

PS4

1

-0.5

1

1

123

40.0%

9

9

8

10

9

100.0%

80.0%

10

8 9 10

10.0%

30.0%

80.0%

100.0%


Search term 2: Activity Diagram

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

2

1

3

2

4

3

5 6

1

2

1

3

2

4

3

2

6

7

1

6

6

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

5

4

2

2

5

4

2

2

5

3

3

5

3

3

4

2

2

4

4

4

4

5

3

3

5

5

5

5

7

6

6

7

6

6

6

9

7

6

6

8

7

7

8

7

7

8

7

7

9

8

8

9

8

8

9

8

8

9

9

7

10 100.0%

1

6

8 9

1

7

10 50.0%

30.0%

30.0%

Overlapping PS1

50.0%

60.0%

PS3

60.0%

30.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

50.0%

30.0%

30.0%

PS2

50.0%

100.0%

60.0%

60.0%

PS3

30.0%

60.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

30.0%

60.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

9

10

100.0%

PS2

7

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

124

60.0%

100.0%

9 10

90.0%

30.0%

60.0%

90.0%

100.0%


Search term 3: Use Case

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

4

1

2

2

3

3

4

1

6 1

4

2

5

3

6

4

7

7

5

8

8

7

9

9

10

10

8

100.0%

70.0%

5 6

100.0%

1

10.0%

10.0%

0.0%

Overlapping PS1

10.0%

PS2

PS3

1 2

7

40.0%

10.0%

PS4

10.0%

0.0%

PS2

10.0%

100.0%

70.0%

40.0%

PS3

10.0%

70.0%

100.0%

70.0%

PS4

0.0%

40.0%

70.0%

100.0%

PS3

2

1

1

2

4

2

2

5

3

3

6

3

3

6

4

4

4

4

7

5

6

5

5

6

8

7

8

10

8

8

8

7

9

9

9

10

10.0%

PS2

1

2

6

100.0%

PS1

1

4

3

PS1

Correlation

2

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

n/a

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

n/a

1

1

1

125

70.0%

100.0%

8 9 10

70.0%

0.0%

40.0%

70.0%

100.0%


Search term 4: System Specification activity case

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

2

1

1

1

3

2

2

2

2

4

3

6

2

1

3 4

1

1

5

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

4 5

6

4

7

6

9

7

6

8

7

10

8

7

9

8

9

8

6

10

9

7

10

9

7

6

10

8

7

100.0%

80.0%

30.0%

20.0%

100.0%

40.0%

30.0%

Overlapping PS1

80.0%

PS2

PS3

30.0%

PS4

100.0%

80.0%

30.0%

20.0%

PS2

80.0%

100.0%

40.0%

30.0%

PS3

30.0%

40.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

20.0%

30.0%

90.0%

100.0%

PS2

PS3

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

9

7

7

7

7

10

8

8

8

8

10 10

9

PS1

Correlation PS1

2

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

126

40.0%

10

10

9

100.0%

90.0%

9 10

20.0%

30.0%

90.0%

100.0%


Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation of top ten results in relation to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2 Module: E-Commerce Search term 1: E-Commerce

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

4

4

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

100.0%

1

5

10.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Overlapping PS1

10.0%

100.0%

PS2

10 70.0%

PS3

70.0%

0.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

10.0%

0.0%

0.0%

PS2

10.0%

100.0%

70.0%

70.0%

PS3

0.0%

70.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

0.0%

70.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

n/a

n/a

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

n/a

1

1

1

PS4

n/a

1

1

1

127

70.0%

100.0%

9 10

90.0%

0.0%

70.0%

90.0%

100.0%


Search term 2: Web 2.0 Technologies

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1 2

2

1

1

7

2

1

6

1

1

2

2

7

7

2

2

8

3

3

8

3

3

4

4

4

4

10

5

5

10

5

5

3

6

6

3

6

6

3

4

4

5

5

6

6

1

1

7

2

2

7

7

7

7

8

8

3

3

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

5

5

10

10

10

10

100.0%

50.0%

50.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

1

10.0%

10.0%

1

10.0%

Overlapping PS1

10.0%

PS2

PS3

6

1

7

3

7

6

6

10.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

10.0%

10.0%

10.0%

PS2

10.0%

100.0%

50.0%

50.0%

PS3

10.0%

50.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

10.0%

50.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

0

0

PS3

1

0

1

1

PS4

1

0

1

1

128

50.0%

10.0%

50.0%


Search term 3: Building E-Commerce Website

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

5

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

8

4

4

4

9

4

4

4

4

4

4

9

5

5

10

5

5

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

8

7

7

8

7

7 8

4 5

1

8

4

9

5

10 100.0%

30.0%

1

6

9

8

8

9

8

10

9

9

10

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

100.0%

8

8

5

5

10

9

9

30.0%

20.0%

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

PS3

30.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

30.0%

30.0%

20.0%

PS2

30.0%

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

PS3

30.0%

90.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

20.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

5

7

9

PS2

10

7

4

Overlapping PS1

9

8 4

30.0%

5

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

129

90.0%

20.0%

80.0%


Search term 4: E-Commerce website Web 2.0 business

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1 2

1

3

2

2

1

6

6

7

6

1

1

7

6

1

1

3

2

7

7

9

7

2

2

9

7

2

2

3

8

8

9

3

3

9

3

3

10

4

4

3

10

4

4

5

5

4

5

5

1

6

6

5

1

6

6

2

7

7

2

7

7

3

8

8

3

8

8

4

4

4

5

5

8

4

9

9

3

5

6

6

9

5

10

10

4

10

6

1

1

5

7

2

2

6 7

1

8

4

9

5

10

6

100.0%

50.0%

1

8 2 50.0%

2 50.0%

Overlapping PS1

50.0%

9

3

3

4

9

9

4

9

9

10

4

4

5

10

10

5

10

10

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS2

PS3

50.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

50.0%

50.0%

50.0%

PS2

50.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

PS3

50.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

50.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

-0.5

-0.5

PS2

1

1

-0.5

-0.5

PS3

-0.5

-0.5

1

1

PS4

-0.5

-0.5

1

1

130

50.0%


Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation of top ten results in relation to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2 Module: Information Knowledge and Management Search term 1: Information and Knowledge Management PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

2

1

2

1

3

2

3

2

5

3

4

4

4

4

5

3

6

5

6

5

9

6

7

1

1

5

5

4

1

1

1

4

2

2

1

1

1

4

2

3

2

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

7

6

6

7

6

6

9

7

7

9

7

7

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

2 7

6

6

8 6

9

10 100.0%

1

2

7

8 9

1

7

7

10 60.0%

20.0%

20.0%

Overlapping PS1

60.0%

100.0%

PS2

40.0%

PS3

40.0%

20.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

60.0%

20.0%

20.0%

PS2

60.0%

100.0%

40.0%

40.0%

PS3

20.0%

40.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

20.0%

40.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

0.9

1

1

PS2

0.9

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

131

40.0%

4

7

20.0%

40.0%


Search term 2: Information economics

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

7

1

1

1

1

1

2

9

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

5

4

4

5

4

5

5

4

6

5

6

5

7

7

7

7

8

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

10

10

10

3

3

4 5

4

6 7

1

8 9

2

10 100.0%

40.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Overlapping PS1

40.0%

6

1

7

6

100.0%

PS2

6

20.0%

PS3

7 6

10.0%

0.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

40.0%

0.0%

0.0%

PS2

40.0%

100.0%

20.0%

10.0%

PS3

0.0%

20.0%

100.0%

70.0%

PS4

0.0%

10.0%

70.0%

100.0%

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

-0.6

n/a

n/a

PS2

-0.6

1

1

1

PS3

n/a

1

1

1

PS4

n/a

1

1

1

132

20.0%

100.0%

70.0%

7

0.0%

10.0%

6

70.0%

100.0%


Search term 3: Managing information organisation

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

2 3

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

2

4

4

6

4

4

6

4

4

5

5

7

5

5

7

5

5

6

6

4

4

8

6

6

8

6

6

7

5

5

7

7

7

7

8

8

6

6

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

7

100.0%

7

4

30.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Overlapping PS1

30.0%

100.0%

PS2

30.0%

PS3

30.0%

0.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

30.0%

0.0%

0.0%

PS2

30.0%

100.0%

30.0%

30.0%

PS3

0.0%

30.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

0.0%

30.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS3

PS4

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS1

1

1

n/a

n/a

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

n/a

1

1

1

PS4

n/a

1

1

1

133

30.0%

0.0%

30.0%


Search term 4: Information and Knowledge Management economics organisation overload

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

3

2 4

1

4

1

1

4

1

1

2

9

2

2

10

2

2

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

7

6

3

1

3

4

3

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

9

7

7

7

7

10

8

8

8

8

4

9

9

10

10

100.0%

60.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Overlapping PS1

60.0%

100.0%

PS2

1

1

6 9

7

6

8

7

10

8

7

9

8

6

9

8

7

7

10

9

8

40.0%

100.0%

90.0%

2 2 40.0%

PS3

40.0%

0.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

60.0%

0.0%

0.0%

PS2

60.0%

100.0%

40.0%

40.0%

PS3

0.0%

40.0%

100.0%

90.0%

PS4

0.0%

40.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Correlation

PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

n/a

n/a

PS2

1

1

0.4

0.4

PS3

n/a

0.4

1

1

PS4

n/a

0.4

1

1

134

0.0%

40.0%

10

9 10

90.0%

100.0%


Rank breakdown, overlapping ratio, correlation of top ten results in relation to the relevant Batches for Experiment 2 Module: Information Architecture Search term 1: Information Architecture PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

3

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

9

3

3

3

3

3

3

10

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

8

8 9

2 3

1

1

1

4

9

3

10

4

100.0%

30.0%

3

3

3

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

9

10 20.0%

20.0%

Overlapping PS1

30.0%

100.0%

PS2

90.0%

PS3

90.0%

20.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

30.0%

20.0%

20.0%

PS2

30.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

PS3

20.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

20.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

135

90.0%

3 9

20.0%

90.0%


Search term 2: Organisational Systems Navigation

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1 2 3

2

2

1

4

3

3

3

1

5

2

6

3

8

4

6

6

7

7

5

5

2

8

1

1

1

1

10

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

4

3

3

4

4

4

4

2

5

5

2

5

5

4

10

5

2

5

6

3

6

4

6

4

8

6

7

5

7

5

9

7

10

8

7 8

4

8

1

9

9

10

10

2

1

100.0%

50.0%

40.0%

100.0%

40.0%

20.0%

20.0%

Overlapping PS1

40.0%

PS2

PS3

20.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

40.0%

20.0%

20.0%

PS2

40.0%

100.0%

50.0%

40.0%

PS3

20.0%

50.0%

100.0%

80.0%

PS4

20.0%

40.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

-0.5

-0.2

PS3

1

-0.5

1

1

PS4

1

-0.2

1

1

136

50.0%

8

6

9

7

9

10

8

10

100.0%

80.0%

20.0%

40.0%

80.0%

100.0%


Search term 3: Findability Search

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

6

6

1

10

6

100.0%

20.0%

1

1

10

6

10 10.0%

10.0%

Overlapping PS1

20.0%

100.0%

PS2

90.0%

PS3

90.0%

10.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

20.0%

10.0%

10.0%

PS2

20.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

PS3

10.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

10.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

137

90.0%

6

10.0%

90.0%


Search term 4: Information Architecture Search Navigation

PS1 vs PS1 PS2 vs PS1 PS3 vs PS1 PS4 vs PS1 PS1 vs PS2 PS2 vs PS2 PS3 vs PS2 PS4 vs PS2 PS1 vs PS3 PS2 vs PS3 PS3 vs PS3 PS4 vs PS3 PS1 vs PS4 PS2 vs PS4 PS3 vs PS4 PS4 vs PS4 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

7

4

4

4

7

4

4

4

7

4

4

4

5

8

5

5

5

8

5

5

5

8

5

5

5

6

9

6

6

6

9

6

6

6

9

6

6

6

7

4

4

4

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

8

5

5

5

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

9

6

6

6

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

10

10

10

10

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

10 100.0%

10 30.0%

30.0%

30.0%

Overlapping PS1

30.0%

100.0%

PS2

90.0%

PS3

90.0%

30.0%

PS4

PS1

100.0%

30.0%

30.0%

30.0%

PS2

30.0%

100.0%

90.0%

90.0%

PS3

30.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

PS4

30.0%

90.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Correlation PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS1

1

1

1

1

PS2

1

1

1

1

PS3

1

1

1

1

PS4

1

1

1

1

138

90.0%

30.0%

90.0%


Google's personal search algorithm and its impact on research  

MSc in Information Systems and Technology

Advertisement
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you