DOI: 10.37016/mr-2020-017
Terbit pada 11 Mei 2020 Pada Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review

How search engines disseminate information about COVID-19 and why they should do better

Aleksandra Urman R. Ulloa M. Makhortykh

Abstrak

Access to accurate and up-to-date information is essential for individual and collective decision making, especially at times of emergency. On February 26, 2020, two weeks before the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the COVID-19’s emergency a “pandemic,” we systematically collected and analyzed search results for the term “coronavirus” in three languages from six search engines. We found that different search engines prioritize specific categories of information sources, such as government-related websites or alternative media. We also observed that source ranking within the same search engine is subjected to randomization, which can result in unequal access to information among users.

Artikel Ilmiah Terkait

This is what a pandemic looks like: Visual framing of COVID-19 on search engines

R. Ulloa M. Makhortykh Aleksandra Urman

22 September 2022

In today's high-choice media environment, search engines play an integral role in informing individuals and societies about the latest events. The importance of search algorithms is even higher at the time of crisis, when users search for information to understand the causes and the consequences of the current situation and decide on their course of action. In our paper, we conduct a comparative audit of how different search engines prioritize visual information related to COVID-19 and what consequences it has for the representation of the pandemic. Using a virtual agent-based audit approach, we examine image search results for the term "coronavirus" in English, Russian and Chinese on five major search engines: Google, Yandex, Bing, Yahoo, and DuckDuckGo. Specifically, we focus on how image search results relate to generic news frames (e.g., the attribution of responsibility, human interest, and economics) used in relation to COVID-19 and how their visual composition varies between the search engines.

Whose relevance? Web search engines as multisided relevance machines

O. Sundin Jutta Haider D. Lewandowski

21 Agustus 2021

This opinion piece takes Google's response to the so‐called COVID‐19 infodemic, as a starting point to argue for the need to consider societal relevance as a complement to other types of relevance. The authors maintain that if information science wants to be a discipline at the forefront of research on relevance, search engines, and their use, then the information science research community needs to address itself to the challenges and conditions that commercial search engines create in. The article concludes with a tentative list of related research topics.

Seek and you shall find? A content analysis on the diversity of five search engines’ results on political queries

S. Geiss Birgit Stark M. Steiner + 1 lainnya

24 Juni 2020

ABSTRACT Search engines are important political news sources and should thus provide users with diverse political information – an important precondition of a well-informed citizenry. The search engines’ algorithmic content selection strongly influences the diversity of the content received by the users – particularly since most users highly trust search engines and often click on only the first result. A widespread concern is that users are not informed diversely by search engines, but how far this concern applies has hardly been investigated. Our study is the first to investigate content diversity provided by five search engines on ten current political issues in Germany. The findings show that sometimes even the first result is highly diverse, but in most cases, more results must be considered to be informed diversely. This unreliability presents a serious challenge when using search engines as political news sources. Our findings call for media policy measures, for example in terms of algorithmic transparency.

The Matter of Chance: Auditing Web Search Results Related to the 2020 U.S. Presidential Primary Elections Across Six Search Engines

M. Makhortykh R. Ulloa Aleksandra Urman

3 Mei 2021

We examine how six search engines filter and rank information in relation to the queries on the U.S. 2020 presidential primary elections under the default—that is nonpersonalized—conditions. For that, we utilize an algorithmic auditing methodology that uses virtual agents to conduct large-scale analysis of algorithmic information curation in a controlled environment. Specifically, we look at the text search results for “us elections,” “donald trump,” “joe biden,” “bernie sanders” queries on Google, Baidu, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, and Yandex, during the 2020 primaries. Our findings indicate substantial differences in the search results between search engines and multiple discrepancies within the results generated for different agents using the same search engine. It highlights that whether users see certain information is decided by chance due to the inherent randomization of search results. We also find that some search engines prioritize different categories of information sources with respect to specific candidates. These observations demonstrate that algorithmic curation of political information can create information inequalities between the search engine users even under nonpersonalized conditions. Such inequalities are particularly troubling considering that search results are highly trusted by the public and can shift the opinions of undecided voters as demonstrated by previous research.

Examining bias perpetuation in academic search engines: an algorithm audit of Google and Semantic Scholar

Maryna Sydorova Roberto Ulloa Mona Bielig + 2 lainnya

16 November 2023

Researchers rely on academic Web search engines to find scientific sources, but search engine mechanisms may selectively present content that aligns with biases embedded in queries. This study examines whether confirmation biased queries prompted into Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar will yield results aligned with a query’s bias. Six queries (topics across health and technology domains such as ‘vaccines’, ‘Internet use’) were analyzed for disparities in search results. We confirm that biased queries (targeting ‘benefits’ or ‘risks’) affect search results in line with bias, with technology-related queries displaying more significant disparities. Overall, Semantic Scholar exhibited fewer disparities than Google Scholar. Topics rated as more polarizing did not consistently show more disparate results. Academic search results that perpetuate confirmation bias have strong implications for both researchers and citizens searching for evidence. More research is needed to explore how scientific inquiry and academic search engines interact.

Daftar Referensi

0 referensi

Tidak ada referensi ditemukan.

Artikel yang Mensitasi

0 sitasi

Tidak ada artikel yang mensitasi.