An official website of the United States government
Abstract Understanding the roles ofsearch gainandcostin users' search decision‐making is a key topic in interactive information retrieval (IIR). While previous research has developed user models based onsimulatedgains and costs, it is unclear how users' actualperceptions of search gains and costsform and change during search interactions. To address this gap, our study adopted expectation‐confirmation theory (ECT) to investigate users' perceptions of gains and costs. We re‐analyzed data from our previous study, examining how contextual and search features affect users' perceptions and how their expectation‐confirmation states impact their following searches. Our findings include: (1) The point where users' actual dwell time meets their constant expectation may serve as a reference point in evaluating perceived gain and cost; (2) these perceptions are associated with in situ experience represented by usefulness labels, browsing behaviors, and queries; (3) users' current confirmation states affect their perceptions of Web page usefulness in the subsequent query. Our findings demonstrate possible effects of expectation‐confirmation, prospect theory, and information foraging theory, highlighting the complex relationships among gain/cost, expectations, and dwell time at the query level, and the reference‐dependent expectation at the session level. These insights enrich user modeling and evaluation in human‐centered IR.
more »
« less
Cognitively Biased Users Interacting with Algorithmically Biased Results in Whole-Session Search on Debated Topics
When interacting with information retrieval (IR) systems, users, affected by confirmation biases, tend to select search results that confirm their existing beliefs on socially significant contentious issues. To understand the judgments and attitude changes of users searching online, our study examined how cognitively biased users interact with algorithmically biased search engine result pages (SERPs). We designed three-query search sessions on debated topics under various bias conditions. We recruited 1,321 crowdsourcing participants and explored their attitude changes, search interactions, and the effects of confirmation bias. Three key findings emerged: 1) most attitude changes occur in the initial query of a search session; 2) Confirmation bias and result presentation on SERPs affect the number and depth of clicks in the current query and perceived familiarity with clicked results in subsequent queries; 3) The bias position also affects attitude changes of users with lower perceived openness to conflicting opinions. Our study goes beyond traditional simulation-based evaluation settings and simulated rational users, sheds light on the mixed effects of human biases and algorithmic biases in information retrieval tasks on debated topics, and can inform the design of bias-aware user models, human-centered bias mitigation techniques, and socially responsible intelligent IR systems.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2106152
- PAR ID:
- 10543481
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- ISBN:
- 9798400706813
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 227 to 237
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Washington DC USA
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Understanding how people interact with search interfaces is core to the field of Interactive Information Retrieval (IIR). While various models have been proposed (e.g., Belkin's ASK, Berry picking, Everyday-life information seeking, Information foraging theory, Economic theory, etc.), they have largely ignored the impact of cognitive biases on search behaviour and performance. A growing body of empirical work exploring how people's cognitive biases influence search and judgments, has led to the development of new models of search that draw upon Behavioural Economics and Psychology. This full day tutorial will provide a starting point for researchers seeking to learn more about information seeking, search and retrieval under uncertainty. The tutorial will be structured into three parts. First, we will provide an introduction of the biases and heuristics program put forward by Tversky and Kahneman [60] (1974) which assumes that people are not always rational. The second part of the tutorial will provide an overview of the types and space of biases in search,[5, 40] before doing a deep dive into several specific examples and the impact of biases on different types of decisions (e.g., health/medical, financial). The third part will focus on a discussion of the practical implication regarding the design and evaluation human-centered IR systems in the light of cognitive biases - where participants will undertake some hands-on exercises.more » « less
-
Three studies (1 survey, 2 experiments) examine cognitive biases in the professional judgments of nationally-representative samples of psychologists working in legal contexts. Study 1 (N= 84) demonstrates robust evidence of the bias blind spot (Pronin, Lin, & Ross, 2002) in experts’ judgments. Psychologists rated their own susceptibility to bias in their professional work lower than their colleagues (and laypeople). As expected, they perceived bias mitigating procedures as more threatening to their own domain than outside domains, and more experience was correlated with higher perceived threat of bias mitigating procedures. Experimental studies 2 (N=118) & 3 (N=128) with randomly-selected psychologists reveals psychologists overwhelmingly engage in confirmation bias (93% with one decision opportunity in study 1, and 90%, 87%, and 82% across three decision opportunities in study 2). Cognitive reflection was negatively correlated with confirmation bias. Psychologists were also susceptible to order effects in that the order of symptoms presented affected their diagnoses–even though the same symptoms existed in the different scenarios (in opposite orders).more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Query Biased Summarization (QBS) aims to produce a summary of the documents retrieved against a query to reduce the human effort for inspecting the full-text content of a document. Typical summarization approaches extract a document text snippet that has term overlap with the query and show that to a searcher. While snippets show relevant information in a document, to the best of our knowledge, there does not exist a summarization system that shows what relevant concepts is missing in a document. Our study focuses on the reduction of user effort in finding relevant documents by exposing them to omitted relevant information. To this end, we use a classical approach, DSPApprox, to find terms or phrases relevant to a query. Then we identify which terms or phrases are missing in a document, present them in a search interface, and ask crowd workers to judge document relevance based on snippets and missing information. Experimental results show both benefits and limitations of this approach.more » « less
-
Perceptual decision-making has been shown to be influenced by reward expected from alternative options or actions, but the underlying neural mechanisms are currently unknown. More specifically, it is debated whether reward effects are mediated through changes in sensory processing, later stages of decision-making, or both. To address this question, we conducted two experiments in which human participants made saccades to what they perceived to be either the first or second of two visually identical but asynchronously presented targets while we manipulated expected reward from correct and incorrect responses on each trial. By comparing reward-induced bias in target selection (i.e., reward bias) during the two experiments, we determined whether reward caused changes in sensory or decision-making processes. We found similar reward biases in the two experiments indicating that reward information mainly influenced later stages of decision-making. Moreover, the observed reward biases were independent of the individual's sensitivity to sensory signals. This suggests that reward effects were determined heuristically via modulation of decision-making processes instead of sensory processing. To further explain our findings and uncover plausible neural mechanisms, we simulated our experiments with a cortical network model and tested alternative mechanisms for how reward could exert its influence. We found that our experimental observations are more compatible with reward-dependent input to the output layer of the decision circuit. Together, our results suggest that, during a temporal judgment task, reward exerts its influence via changing later stages of decision-making (i.e., response bias) rather than early sensory processing (i.e., perceptual bias).more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3664190.3672520
