inconsistencies web search performance -Reply

[Wayne Daniels]

Yes it is vexing, but unsurprising. I think that as long as users
have a distorted idea of what can and cannot be done with a search
engine, they are apt to experience frustration. I read with sympathy
and interest of attempts to make engines more efficient, perhaps more
truly representative of the knowledge-seeking behaviour of users. The
trouble with the latter aim is that it tends to work best at a level
of some sophistication. Most users are, I suspect, at the level of
average persons who approach the reference desk of a library. They
have difficulty formulating the precise nature of what they require
and, even if they *have* hit upon a phrase they think describes it,
find it hard to map that expression against another set of linguistic
coordinates that would more likely result in a successful search.
This is not news. People in libraries, even quite intelligent ones,
tend not to want to know how the librarian found the material. How
much less likely are such people to be successful without an
intermediary. That's why I am particularly interested (and have been
involved) in exploring the possibilities of a classified approach to
knowledge management. But that is another topic.

Best,

Wayne Daniels   

Metro Toronto Reference Library     
wdaniels at gwmail.mtrl.toronto.on.ca     

>>> "N. TOMAIUOLO, INSTRUCTION LIBRARIAN, CCSU"
<TOMAIUOLON at CCSUA.CTSTATEU.EDU>  11/7/97, 10:03am >>>
Colleagues,
For the past couple of days we have been discussing the gross
inconsistencies 
of www search engines. Erroneous results from "top" engines for
subjects 
including "date rape" and "roman sites" were reported.  One colleague
said 
(tongue not so firmly in cheek) as much as "then you cannot search
for date 
rape".  Explanations were profferedthat some search words are
"concealed" (i.e., 
date and sites in the above examples).  Furthermore, it was mentioned
that the 
concealed "stopwords" could change with every "crawl".

This type of news is unsettling for the professional searcher, the
librarian who 
tries to teach about engines, and should be very alarming to the
end-user.  If
search engines do not a) work as they should per the engine's own
help pages or
b) work inconsistently, there is the *theoretical* point of why
bothering to 
have them at all.  LookSmart, Excite, and Yahoo could be relied on
for 
hierarchical directory type searches.

The point is that as a professional searcher who has seen the
accuracy of 
powerful engines including Dialog, BRS, STN and reliable CD ROM
products, I'm 
wondering when we are going to be offered this type of accuracy with
the web.
"The Web made simple" book, and "Search Engine Secrets ofthe Pros"
(PC World 
article) nothwithstanding -- these engines including AltaVista,
Lycos, InfoSeek, 
et al, do not perform as they should on a consistent basis.  Is this
vexing 
anyone besides me?

Nicholas G. Tomaiuolo, MLS
Bibliographic Instruction Librarian
Central Connecticut State University Library
Reference Department
New Britain, CT  06050

http://library.ccsu.ctstateu.edu/~bibman
email=  tomaiuolon at ccsu.ctstateu.edu
phone=  (860) 832-2068
fax=    (860) 832-3409