Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Sünkler, S."
  • × author_ss:"Lewandowski, D."
  1. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.; Hanisch, F.: Anzeigenkennzeichnung auf Suchergebnisseiten : Empirische Ergebnisse und Implikationen für die Forschung (2019) 0.02 
    0.017307041 = product of:
  0.05192112 = sum of:
    0.009274333 = weight(_text_:in in 5022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009274333 = score(doc=5022,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 5022, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5022)
    0.042646788 = weight(_text_:und in 5022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042646788 = score(doc=5022,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.4407773 = fieldWeight in 5022, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5022)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    In diesem Aufsatz stellen wir eine repräsentative Multimethodenstudie (bestehend aus Umfrage, aufgabenbasierter Nutzerstudie und OnlineExperiment) zum Wissen und Verhalten der deutschen Internetnutzer bezüglich der Anzeigen auf Google-Suchergebnisseiten vor. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die überwiegende Mehrzahl der Nutzenden nicht hinreichend in der Lage ist, Werbung von organischen Ergebnissen zu unterscheiden. Die aufgabenbasierte Studie zeigt, dass lediglich 1,3 Prozent der Teilnehmenden alle Anzeigen und organischen Ergebnisse richtig markieren konnten. 9,6 Prozent haben ausschließlich korrekte Markierungen vorgenommen, dabei aber keine Vollständigkeit erreicht. Aus den Ergebnissen der Umfrage geht hervor, dass es viele Unklarheiten gibt über das Geschäftsmodell von Google und die Art und Weise, wie Suchmaschinenwerbung funktioniert. Die Ergebnisse des Online-Experiments zeigen, dass Nutzende, die die Unterscheidung zwischen Anzeigen und organischen Ergebnissen nicht verstehen, etwa doppelt so häufig auf Anzeigen klicken wie diejenigen, die diese Unterscheidung verstehen. Implikationen für die Forschung ergeben sich in den Bereichen Wiederholungsstudien bzw. Monitoring der Anzeigendarstellung, vertiefende Laborstudien, Modelle des Informationsverhaltens, Informationskompetenz und Entwicklung fairer Suchmaschinen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 70(2019) H.1, S.3-14
  2. Lewandowski, D.; Krewinkel, A.; Gleissner, M.; Osterode, D.; Tolg, B.; Holle, M.; Sünkler, S.: Entwicklung und Anwendung einer Software zur automatisierten Kontrolle des Lebensmittelmarktes im Internet mit informationswissenschaftlichen Methoden (2019) 0.02 
    0.016000442 = product of:
  0.048001327 = sum of:
    0.005354538 = weight(_text_:in in 5025) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005354538 = score(doc=5025,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 5025, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5025)
    0.042646788 = weight(_text_:und in 5025) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042646788 = score(doc=5025,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.4407773 = fieldWeight in 5025, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5025)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    In diesem Artikel präsentieren wir die Durchführung und die Ergebnisse eines interdisziplinären Forschungsprojekts zum Thema automatisierte Lebensmittelkontrolle im Web. Es wurden Kompetenzen aus den Disziplinen Lebensmittelwissenschaft, Rechtswissenschaft, Informationswissenschaft und Informatik dazu genutzt, ein detailliertes Konzept und einen Software-Prototypen zu entwickeln, um das Internet nach Produktangeboten zu durchsuchen, die gegen das Lebensmittelrecht verstoßen. Dabei wird deutlich, wie ein solcher Anwendungsfall von den Methoden der Information-Retrieval-Evaluierung profitiert, und wie sich mit relativ geringem Aufwand eine flexible Software programmieren lässt, die auch für eine Vielzahl anderer Fragestellungen einsetzbar ist. Die Ergebnisse des Projekts zeigen, wie komplexe Arbeitsprozesse einer Behörde mit Hilfe der Methoden von Retrieval-Tests und gängigen Verfahren aus dem maschinellen Lernen effektiv und effizient unterstützt werden können.
    Field
    Lebensmittel und Ernährung
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 70(2019) H.1, S.33-45
  3. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.: ¬Das Relevance Assessment Tool : eine modulare Software zur Unterstützung bei der Durchführung vielfältiger Studien mit Suchmaschinen (2019) 0.01 
    0.013119834 = product of:
  0.0393595 = sum of:
    0.0075724614 = weight(_text_:in in 5026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075724614 = score(doc=5026,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 5026, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5026)
    0.031787038 = weight(_text_:und in 5026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031787038 = score(doc=5026,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.328536 = fieldWeight in 5026, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5026)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    In diesem Artikel stellen wir eine Software vor, mit der sich Studien zu Such- und Informationssystemen realisieren lassen. Das Relevance Assessment Tool (RAT) soll umfangreiche Untersuchungen mit Daten von kommerziellen Suchmaschinen unterstützen. Die Software ist modular und webbasiert. Es lassen sich damit automatisiert Daten von Suchmaschinen erfassen. Dazu können Studien mit Fragen und Skalen flexibel gestaltet und die Informationsobjekte anhand der Fragen durch Juroren bewertet werden. Durch die Modularität lassen sich die einzelnen Komponenten für eine Vielzahl von Studien nutzen, die sich auf Web-Inhalte beziehen. So kann die Software auch für qualitative Inhaltsanalysen eingesetzt werden oder durch das automatisierte Scraping eine große Datenbasis an Web-Dokumenten liefern, die sich quantitativ in empirischen Studien analysieren lassen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 70(2019) H.1, S.46-56
  4. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.: What does Google recommend when you want to compare insurance offerings? (2019) 0.01 
    0.007903522 = product of:
  0.023710564 = sum of:
    0.008924231 = weight(_text_:in in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008924231 = score(doc=5288,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
    0.014786332 = product of:
      0.029572664 = sum of:
        0.029572664 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029572664 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15286934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5288)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a new method to improve the analysis of search engine results by considering the provider level as well as the domain level. This approach is tested by conducting a study using queries on the topic of insurance comparisons. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an empirical study that analyses the results of search queries aimed at comparing insurance companies. The authors used a self-developed software system that automatically queries commercial search engines and automatically extracts the content of the returned result pages for further data analysis. The data analysis was carried out using the KNIME Analytics Platform. Findings Google's top search results are served by only a few providers that frequently appear in these results. The authors show that some providers operate several domains on the same topic and that these domains appear for the same queries in the result lists. Research limitations/implications The authors demonstrate the feasibility of this approach and draw conclusions for further investigations from the empirical study. However, the study is a limited use case based on a limited number of search queries. Originality/value The proposed method allows large-scale analysis of the composition of the top results from commercial search engines. It allows using valid empirical data to determine what users actually see on the search engine result pages.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Information Science in the German-speaking Countries
  5. Schaer, P.; Mayr, P.; Sünkler, S.; Lewandowski, D.: How relevant is the long tail? : a relevance assessment study on million short (2016) 0.00 
    0.0014873719 = product of:
  0.008924231 = sum of:
    0.008924231 = weight(_text_:in in 3144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008924231 = score(doc=3144,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3144, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3144)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Users of web search engines are known to mostly focus on the top ranked results of the search engine result page. While many studies support this well known information seeking pattern only few studies concentrate on the question what users are missing by neglecting lower ranked results. To learn more about the relevance distributions in the so-called long tail we conducted a relevance assessment study with the Million Short long-tail web search engine. While we see a clear difference in the content between the head and the tail of the search engine result list we see no statistical significant differences in the binary relevance judgments and weak significant differences when using graded relevance. The tail contains different but still valuable results. We argue that the long tail can be a rich source for the diversification of web search engine result lists but it needs more evaluation to clearly describe the differences.
    Footnote
    To appear in Experimental IR Meets Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Interaction. 7th International Conference of the CLEF Association, CLEF 2016, \'Evora, Portugal, September 5-8, 2016.
  6. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.; Kerkmann, F.: Are ads on Google search engine results pages labeled clearly enough? : the influence of knowledge on search ads on users' selection behaviour (2017) 0.00 
    0.0014873719 = product of:
  0.008924231 = sum of:
    0.008924231 = weight(_text_:in in 3567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008924231 = score(doc=3567,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3567, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3567)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    In an online experiment using a representative sample of the German online population (n = 1.000), we compare users' selection behaviour on two versions of the same Google search engine results page (SERP), one showing advertisements and organic results, the other showing organic results only. Selection behaviour is analyzed in relation to users' knowledge on Google's business model, on SERP design, and on these users' actual performance in marking advertisements on SERPs correctly. We find that users who were not able to mark ads correctly selected ads significantly more often. This leads to the conclusion that ads need to be labeled more clearly, and that there is a need for more information literacy in search engine users.
  7. Lewandowski, D.; Kerkmann, F.; Rümmele, S.; Sünkler, S.: ¬An empirical investigation on search engine ad disclosure (2018) 0.00 
    0.0014724231 = product of:
  0.008834538 = sum of:
    0.008834538 = weight(_text_:in in 4115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008834538 = score(doc=4115,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 4115, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4115)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    This representative study of German search engine users (N?=?1,000) focuses on the ability of users to distinguish between organic results and advertisements on Google results pages. We combine questions about Google's business with task-based studies in which users were asked to distinguish between ads and organic results in screenshots of results pages. We find that only a small percentage of users can reliably distinguish between ads and organic results, and that user knowledge of Google's business model is very limited. We conclude that ads are insufficiently labelled as such, and that many users may click on ads assuming that they are selecting organic results.

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes