The impact of search engine data sharing on competition and consumer welfare

Googling for Health Information

We would like to respond to the article entitled ‘‘Validity and reliability of a systematic database search strategy to identify publications resulting from pharmacy residency research projects.’’ We agree with the authors’ novel approach to confirm publication via a survey and to identify resident publications via a systematic approach to validate the utility of the database. The authors suggest that this approach can be used to compare publication success between residency programs. Additionally, this information can be used for marketing purposes for the individual residency program. One limitation noted by the authors was the use of only PubMed and EMBASE as the search engines to identify resident publications in the study and suggest other search engines, such as International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) and Google Scholar, may be used as alternatives. We aim to describe the methods and results of our project in which we assessed the utility of 5 different search engines to identify resident publications. Briefly, we identified the publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2003 (n 1⁄4 171), 2005 (n 1⁄4 221), and 2007 (n 1⁄4 273) Great Lakes Pharmacy Resident Conference (GLPRC) was 11.4% (n 1⁄4 76). We used a similar search strategy in Kwak et al to identify resident publication using the search engines (1) Scopus, (2) IPA, and (3) MEDLINE (PubMed). For this project, we used information from the abstracts that were previously confirmed for publications (n 1⁄4 76) to identify the proportion of these publications found in each of the following search engines: (1) Scopus, (2) IPA, (3) MEDLINE (PubMed), (4) EMBASE, and (5) Google Scholar. Two investigators (SMV and PMS) identified published research projects, and any disagreement between investigators was reviewed for consensus. A kappa statistic was calculated to determine interrater reliability for each search engine. The proportion of the published research was compared for each of the 5 search engines. Additionally, all pairs of search engines were assessed to determine the proportion published using combinations of searches. The proportions of published works were identified in the following search engines: Scopus (90.8%), IPA (75%), MEDLINE (PubMed; 80.3%), EMBASE (88.2%), and Google Scholar (90.8%; Table 1). Additionally, a higher proportion of nonpharmacy journals were identified using the search strategy compared to pharmacy journals (Table 1) in each individual search engine. After assessing various combinations, only Scopus plus IPA or Google Scholar plus IPA identified all 76 publications (Table 2). Based on our results, no single search engine was able to identify all publications. All 9 potential pairs were assessed. Only the combination use of either Scopus and IPA or Google Scholar and IPA resulted in identifying all 76 publications. The use of MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE resulted in the poorest combination of search engines, as it only identified 88.2% (n 1⁄4 67) of publications. Kwak et al used the combination of MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE with great success; however, the utility of this combination may differ in a general population of residency programs. Residents of certain geographic areas may submit to journals indexed to different search engines which may have contributed to the differences between our study and Kwak et al, as we assessed abstracts from the Great Lakes region. Additionally, confirmed publications in our previous search strategy used Scopus, IPA, and MEDLINE (PubMed) and not a validated measure which may have influenced our results. In conclusion, we affirm that a validated measure approach, as used by Kwak et al, is the gold standard for confirming the utility of various search engines; however, it may be difficult to replicate in a larger, generalized population of residents. The use of a single search engine is likely not adequate to identify all published residents’ studies. Regional differences may exist in the use of search engines, as the combination of MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE resulted in a high sensitivity in Kwak

Web search engines have become an important and trusted source when people seek political information. Even though previous research suggests that information about politicians in traditional and new media can provide content that makes stereotypes based on gender and party, little is known about the presence of such bias in search engines, which function as information gatekeepers in the digital age. Using quantitative text analysis and human coding techniques on a novel data set of members of the German parliament, this study examines whether search engine suggestions, i.e. search predictions, for politicians differ with respect to personal and role-oriented information based on the gender and party of the politician. It also explores whether the search engine representation of politicians changes around elections. The study further compares gender and party differences in search engine results with corresponding Wikipedia articles of the same politicians, as users are most often redirected to Wikipedia from Google. The results suggest that politicians’ representation in search engines and Wikipedia are structured by a joint effect of their gender and party identity. While Google suggestions provide less personal information about female politicians belonging to a right-wing party compared to their male counterparts, this relationship is not observable for left-wing parties. Moreover, there are changes in gender biases around the election. In Wikipedia articles, politicians belonging to right-wing parties are represented with more personal information compared to politicians belonging to left ones, an effect which is even stronger for females.

Purpose ”“ Considering the relevance of personal data protection, this article focuses on the identification of the criteria used by Colombian Courts regarding the rights to access, modification and erasure personal data within the context of information made available through search engines. This framework will expose the different cases ruled by the Colombian Constitutional Court as it attempts to highlight which were the criteria used by the courts that brought them to rule that search engines are mere intermediaries between the content makers and data subjects. Finally, this study aims to contribute not only to the data protection legal literature in Colombia, but also, to improve the possibilities to effectively implement user´s rights of online search engines in Colombia. Methodology ”“In order to achieve the purpose of this research project, the following methodological strategies will be employed: (i) Legal-analytical study, by way of reviewing the Colombian regulatory framework in order to map out main rules regarding the fundamental rights to access, modification and erasure of personal data, and determining which ones are the aspects hindering the effective implementation of the rights; (ii) Legal-theoretical study, where it reviews the issues identified by legal scholars as hampering the implementation of data protection rights in general; (iii) Legal-empirical study that aims to raise awareness regarding the incidence of the activities carried out by search engines in the life of data subjects. Findings ”“ The Colombian Constitutional Court has seen search engines as mere intermediaries, meaning they do not have to rectify, correct, eliminate or complete the information listed in the results they provide. This approach demands that the Judiciary enforces the existence of a right to request the erasure of links and the need of procedures provided by them to do it effectively without erasing or altering the content of the website. This delisting process should not be arbitrary based on conditions that allow data subjects to ask the erasure of links associated with their names. In the European Union, the conditions to get those results delisted are inadequacy, irrelevance, or excessiveness in relation to the processing purposes. The current position of the Constitutional Court about the search engines role and their responsibilities has not protected the user’s fundamental rights to privacy, reputation, and honor. Therefore, a more committed study on behalf of the Court is required. Practical Implications ”“ In the Muebles Caquetá Case, the Court must point out the importance of the activities carried out by online search engines, and force them to face the implications of being a “controller” of the processing of personal data that takes place within their services. I suggest that the Court itself should draft clear delisting guidelines considering the opinions of a group of impartial experts, civil society representatives and the local Data Protection Authority. Originality ”“ Considering the implications posed by personal data and data mining, this article identifies the legal and regulatory framework surrounding those activities and in way contribute to create a data protection culture in Latin America, raise awareness regarding the incidence of search engines in the life of data rights holders, identify possible disconnections between the existent regulatory framework for personal data rights, and facilitate the cooperation between Courts and stakeholders of the telecommunication and media sectors, based on the common goal of fulfilling the public interests of ensuring data protection rights.

Search engines’ responses to several search feature selections

FindZebra: A search engine for rare diseases

Access to electronic information resources is believed to enhance medical students’ academic engagement, research skills, and performance. Search engines emerged to render the responsibilities. However, if accessibility is disrupted, students’ activities could be negatively altered.This study investigates the influence of search engines and accessibility of electronic information resources (EIRs) on academic activities among 585 medical students at the College of Medical Sciences, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria. Employing a correlational survey design, a sample of 233 students from seven departments was selected using multi-stage sampling. Data were collected via a validated questionnaire (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.83) with a 93% response rate and analysed using descriptive (mean, standard deviation) and inferential (logistic regression) statistics. Findings reveal high engagement in literature reviews, research projects, and exam preparation (x̅= 1.91–1.93), but low participation in evidence-based medicine assignments and journal clubs (x̅= 1.40–1.49). EIR accessibility is low, with multimedia resources moderately used (x̅ = 1.63) compared to online journals and e-books (x̅= 1.24–1.39). YouTube is the most used search engine (x̅ = 1.84), while academic search engines like Google Scholar are underutilized (x̅ = 1.26). Logistic regression indicates significant relationships between multimedia search engines (OR = 2.48, p < 0.001), Google Scholar (OR = 1.68, p = 0.001), and EIR accessibility, and between multimedia resources (OR = 2.29, p < 0.001), e-books (OR = 1.79, p < 0.001), and academic activities. Low digital literacy and institutional barriers limit EIR use. The study concluded that search engines play significant roles in accessing EIR and enhanced academic activities depend on extent to which EIR are used through accessibility. It is recommended that mandatory workshops, promotional campaigns, and provision of digital infrastructure should be the priorities of libraries with financial support from governments.

Data Access, Consumer Interests and Social Welfare: An Economic Perspective

The speed of information and competitors in the internet world makes duniagoogle.com website not included in the search list and searches of the first page of Google, thus causing the website to be quiet and not have a maximum end. To overcome the problem of increasing website page visits, it is necessary to optimize using the Search Engine Optimization (SEO) method. The stages in this study were carried out with 2 stages through website analysis and process analysis. While the website SEO method uses 5 techniques, namely creating page segmentation, content structure, speed optimization, keyword research, and utilizing website backlinks. This technique is able to provide more optimal traffic to compete with other website competitors. The goal is that this website can appear on the first page of Google search, so as to get maximum results in the business world using the website. The results of website optimization based on the analysis and application of this method, the main page of the website with the main keyword duniagoogle.com has been indexed in the search engine and google search the first page. A total of 4 posts based on google search short keywords have been found to also appear on the first page of the google search engine. It is certain that the number of statistical website visits has increased from before. In the future, this website will continue to be optimized so that it gets better results. If there is further research related to this website optimization research based on the development of internet technology, it is likely that there are changes and new opportunities, then it must be further researched to be developed, so that the website can survive and compete in the world of Google search engines.

How different are search engines? The search engine wars are a favorite topic of on-line analysts, as two of the biggest companies in the world, Google and Microsoft, battle for prevalence of the web search space. Differences in search engine popularity can be explained by their effectiveness or other factors, such as familiarity with the most popular first engine, peer imitation, or force of habit. In this work we present a thorough analysis of the affinity of the two major search engines, Google and Bing, along with DuckDuckGo, which goes to great lengths to emphasize its privacy-friendly credentials. To do so, we collected search results using a comprehensive set of 300 unique queries for two time periods in 2016 and 2019, and developed a new similarity metric that leverages both the content and the ranking of search responses. We evaluated the characteristics of the metric against other metrics and approaches that have been proposed in the literature, and used it to (1) investigate the similarities of search engine results, (2) the evolution of their affinity over time, (3) what aspects of the results influence similarity, and (4) how the metric differs over different kinds of search services. We found that Google stands apart, but Bing and DuckDuckGo are largely indistinguishable from each other.

The purpose of this paper is to show how certain uses of search-engine technology raise concerns for personal privacy. In particular, we examine some privacy implications involving the use of search engines to acquire information about persons. We consider both a hypothetical scenario and an actual case in which one or more search engines are used to find information about an individual. In analyzing these two cases, we note that both illustrate an existing problem that has been exacerbated by the use of search engines and the Internet – viz., the problem of articulating key distinctions involving the public vs. private aspects of personal information. We then draw a distinction between “public personal information” (or PPI) and “nonpublic personal information” (or NPI) to see how this scheme can be applied to a problem of protecting some forms of personal information that are now easily manipulated by computers and search engines – a concern that, following Helen Nissenbaum (1998, 2004), we describe as the problem of privacy in public.

Due to the increasing information on the Web it becomes very difficult for a single search engine to provide comprehensive Web coverage, thus increasing the difficulty for an average user to search information on the web. We have proposed an idea for smart Meta search engine which will have a more comprehensive coverage of the web by targeting different search engines for different search categories. The user's search query will be modified using a knowledge base and appropriate search engine will be selected. The results returned from these search engines will be merged and ranked. These results will be classified into various categories using a classification algorithm and then the result will be displayed sorted into categories. It will be beneficial to the user who has an obscure idea about the information he/she wanted to search.

Malign Manipulations: Can Google's Shareholders Save Democracy?

Background of the study: Google has become the most popular search engine worldwide and its name has its own merit within information search, as such when people are searching for information they would most often say ‘google it’ rather than ‘look for it’. Purpose: The present research employs information experience perspective that investigates students of Universitas Diponegoro when they are using Google search to help complete their assignments. Method: The research method used to capture the information experience of Universitas Diponegoro students when using Google to look for information associated with their studies was the qualitative research method. Semi-structured interviews were used in this study to explore further information experience of students in exploring information using the Google search engine Findings: The findings revealed that undergraduate students have their own techniques when using Google search. They are well familiar with formulating search queries; the majority being able to take on this stage of task easily. However, students found it challenging when they have to start evaluating which of the search results would give the most relevant information to help with their assignments. Conclusions: Students’ prior knowledge appeared to be the governing factor of how well they are able to determine which of the compiled information sources are best for their study. Every student has their own best approach and experience to optimize Google. Generally, it was found that the students within this study had similar ways in formulating keywords to search for information on Google and were only different in certain details of experiences.

Given the importance of Google Search in generating visits to institutional repositories (IR), a lack of visibility in search engine results pages can hinder the possibility of their publications being found, read, downloaded, and, eventually, cited. To address this, institutions need to evaluate the visibility of their repositories to determine what actions might be implemented to enhance them. However, measuring the search engine optimization (SEO) visibility of IRs requires a highly accurate, technically feasible method. This study constitutes the first attempt to design such a method, specifically applied here to measuring the IR visibility of Spain’s national university system in Google Search based on a set of SEO-based metrics derived from the Ubersuggest SEO tool. A comprehensive dataset spanning three months and comprising 217,589 bibliographic records and 316,899 organic keywords is used as a baseline. Our findings show that many records deposited in these repositories are not ranked among the top positions in Google Search results, and that the most visible records are mainly academic works (theses and dissertations) written in Spanish in the Humanities and Social Sciences. However, most visits are generated by a small number of records. All in all, our results call into question the role played by IRs in attracting readers via Google Search to the institutions’ scientific heritage and serve to underscore the prevailing emphasis within IRs on preservation as opposed to online dissemination. Potential improvements might be achieved using enhanced metadata schemes and normalized description practices, as well as by adopting other actionable insights that can strengthen the online visibility of IRs. This study increases understanding of the role played by web indicators in assessing the web-based impact of research outputs deposited in IRs, and should be of particular interest for a range of stakeholders, including open access and open science advocates, research agencies, library practitioners, repository developers, and website administrators.