Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3658271.3658310acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbsiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A framework to support experimentation in the context of Cognitive Biases in Search as a Learning process

Published: 23 May 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Context: Information seeking plays a key role in the learning process, enabling individuals to acquire knowledge and make well-informed decisions. However, this process is not exempt from cognitive biases that can distort the way we interpret and use available information. Ongoing research seeks to comprehend and mitigate these biases to enhance search efficacy and promote effective learning. Problem: Despite these efforts, existing empirical experimentation remain confined to isolated platforms, hindering reproducibility and collaborative progress within the field. This limitation underscores a critical need for a more unified approach to experimentation. Solution: In response, we propose a comprehensive framework designed to support and standardize experimentation. IS theory: Our approach aligns with Design Theory, establishing a connection between cognitive biases and the technical dimensions of the information system. Method: To define the requirements of the proposed framework, a thorough literature review on cognitive biases in search was conducted. The framework’s efficacy is demonstrated through a proof of concept. Summary of Results: We showcase the framework applicability by instantiating it with a study on confirmation bias within a health-related search task. This implementation is particularly relevant as it integrates crucial components and requirements identified in previous research. Contributions and Impact in IS area: Our proposed framework bridges a significant gap in the field by presenting a standardized approach to conducting experiments on information seeking and cognitive biases. This not only fortifies the reliability of individual studies but also fosters collaborative efforts, enabling a more profound understanding of information-seeking behaviors across diverse domains within the Information Systems community.

References

[1]
Leif Azzopardi. 2021. Cognitive Biases in Search: A Review and Reflection of Cognitive Biases in Information Retrieval. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (Canberra ACT, Australia) (CHIIR ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1145/3406522.3446023
[2]
Ricardo Baeza-Yates. 2018. Bias on the web. Commun. ACM 61, 6 (2018), 54–61.
[3]
Sara Behimehr and Hamid R Jamali. 2020. Cognitive biases and their effects on information behaviour of graduate students in their research projects. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice 8, 2 (2020), 18–31.
[4]
Buster Benson. 2016. Cognitive bias cheat sheet. https://betterhumans.pub/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18. [Online; accessed July-2023].
[5]
Clodis Boscarioli, Renata Mendes de Araujo, Rita Suzana Maciel, Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto, Flavio Oquendo, Elisa Yumi Nakagawa, Flavia Cristina Berrnardini, José Viterbo, Dalessandro Vianna, Carlos Bazilio Martins, 2017. I GranDSI-BR: Grand Research Challenges in Information Systems in Brazil 2016-2026. Special Committee on Information Systems (CE-SI). 1 (2017), 184p.
[6]
Gabriela Corbari Dos Santos, Deivid Eive Dos S. Silva, and Natasha Malveira C. Valentim. 2023. Proposal and Preliminary Evaluation of a Learner Experience Evaluation Model in Information Systems. In Proceedings of the XIX Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems (, Maceió, Brazil, ) (SBSI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 308–316. https://doi.org/10.1145/3592813.3592919
[7]
Kahneman Daniel. 2017. Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
[8]
Amira Ghenai, Mark D. Smucker, and Charles L.A. Clarke. 2020. A Think-Aloud Study to Understand Factors Affecting Online Health Search. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (Vancouver BC, Canada) (CHIIR ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1145/3343413.3377961
[9]
Souvick Ghosh, Manasa Rath, and Chirag Shah. 2018. Searching as Learning: Exploring Search Behavior and Learning Outcomes in Learning-related Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Human Information Interaction & Retrieval (New Brunswick, NJ, USA) (CHIIR ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3176349.3176386
[10]
Paulo Gimenez, Marcelo Machado, Cleber Pinelli, and Sean Siqueira. 2020. Investigating the learning perspective of Searching as Learning, a review of the state of the art. In Anais do XXXI Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação (Online). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil, 302–311. https://doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2020.302
[11]
Gisoo Gomroki, Hassan Behzadi, Rahmatolloah Fattahi, and Javad Salehi Fadardi. 2023. Identifying effective cognitive biases in information retrieval. Journal of Information Science 49, 2 (2023), 348–358.
[12]
Martie G. Haselton, Daniel Nettle, and Damian R. Murray. 2015. The Evolution of Cognitive Bias. In The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Online, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119125563.evpsych241 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781119125563.evpsych241
[13]
Elizabeth C Hirschman. 1983. Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research (pre-1986) 20, 000002 (1983), 217.
[14]
Markus Kattenbeck and David Elsweiler. 2019. Understanding credibility judgements for web search snippets. Aslib Journal of Information Management 71, 3 (2019), 368–391.
[15]
Diane Kelly 2009. Methods for evaluating interactive information retrieval systems with users. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval 3, 1–2 (2009), 1–224.
[16]
Diane Kelly and Cassidy R Sugimoto. 2013. A systematic review of interactive information retrieval evaluation studies, 1967–2006. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64, 4 (2013), 745–770.
[17]
Alla Keselman, Allen C Browne, and David R Kaufman. 2008. Consumer health information seeking as hypothesis testing. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 15, 4 (2008), 484–495.
[18]
Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick, Benjamin K Johnson, and Axel Westerwick. 2015. Confirmation bias in online searches: Impacts of selective exposure before an election on political attitude strength and shifts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 20, 2 (2015), 171–187.
[19]
Juhi Kulshrestha, Motahhare Eslami, Johnnatan Messias, Muhammad Bilal Zafar, Saptarshi Ghosh, Krishna P. Gummadi, and Karrie Karahalios. 2017. Quantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Media. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Portland, Oregon, USA) (CSCW ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 417–432. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998321
[20]
Annie YS Lau and Enrico W Coiera. 2007. Do people experience cognitive biases while searching for information?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 14, 5 (2007), 599–608.
[21]
Marcelo Machado, Paulo Gimenez, and Sean Siqueira. 2020. Raising the Dimensions and Variables for Searching as a Learning Process: A Systematic Mapping of the Literature. In Anais do XXXI Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação (Online). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil, 1393–1402. https://doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2020.1393
[22]
Alamir Novin and Eric Meyers. 2017. Making Sense of Conflicting Science Information: Exploring Bias in the Search Engine Result Page. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (Oslo, Norway) (CHIIR ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1145/3020165.3020185
[23]
Frances A. Pogacar, Amira Ghenai, Mark D. Smucker, and Charles L.A. Clarke. 2017. The Positive and Negative Influence of Search Results on People’s Decisions about the Efficacy of Medical Treatments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) (ICTIR ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1145/3121050.3121074
[24]
Suppanut Pothirattanachaikul, Takehiro Yamamoto, Yusuke Yamamoto, and Masatoshi Yoshikawa. 2019. Analyzing the Effects of Document’s Opinion and Credibility on Search Behaviors and Belief Dynamics. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (Beijing, China) (CIKM ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1653–1662. https://doi.org/10.1145/3357384.3357886
[25]
Suppanut Pothirattanachaikul, Takehiro Yamamoto, Yusuke Yamamoto, and Masatoshi Yoshikawa. 2020. Analyzing the Effects of "People also ask" on Search Behaviors and Beliefs. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media (Virtual Event, USA) (HT ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372923.3404786
[26]
Alisa Rieger, Tim Draws, Mariët Theune, and Nava Tintarev. 2021. This Item Might Reinforce Your Opinion: Obfuscation and Labeling of Search Results to Mitigate Confirmation Bias. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media (Virtual Event, USA) (HT ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1145/3465336.3475101
[27]
Soo Young Rieh, Kevyn Collins-Thompson, Preben Hansen, and Hye-Jung Lee. 2016. Towards searching as a learning process: A review of current perspectives and future directions. Journal of Information Science 42, 1 (2016), 19–34.
[28]
Milad Shokouhi, Ryen White, and Emine Yilmaz. 2015. Anchoring and Adjustment in Relevance Estimation. In Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (Santiago, Chile) (SIGIR ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 963–966. https://doi.org/10.1145/2766462.2767841
[29]
Atanu R Sinha, Navita Goyal, Sunny Dhamnani, Tanay Asija, Raja K Dubey, M V Kaarthik Raja, and Georgios Theocharous. 2022. Personalized Detection of Cognitive Biases in Actions of Users from Their Logs: Anchoring and Recency Biases. arxiv:2206.15129 [cs.AI]
[30]
Masaki Suzuki and Yusuke Yamamoto. 2021. Analysis of Relationship between Confirmation Bias and Web Search Behavior. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Information Integration and Web-Based Applications & Services (Chiang Mai, Thailand) (iiWAS ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1145/3428757.3429086
[31]
Peter M Todd and Gerd Gigerenzer. 2000. Précis of simple heuristics that make us smart. Behavioral and brain sciences 23, 5 (2000), 727–741.
[32]
Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. 1974. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185, 4157 (1974), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 arXiv:https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
[33]
Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. 1992. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and uncertainty 5, 4 (1992), 297–323.
[34]
Ryen White. 2013. Beliefs and biases in web search. In Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (Dublin, Ireland) (SIGIR ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2484028.2484053
[35]
Ryen W. White and Eric Horvitz. 2015. Belief Dynamics and Biases in Web Search. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 33, 4, Article 18 (may 2015), 46 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2746229
[36]
Luyan Xu, Mengdie Zhuang, and Ujwal Gadiraju. 2021. How Do User Opinions Influence Their Interaction With Web Search Results?. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (Utrecht, Netherlands) (UMAP ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 240–244. https://doi.org/10.1145/3450613.3456824

Index Terms

  1. A framework to support experimentation in the context of Cognitive Biases in Search as a Learning process

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    SBSI '24: Proceedings of the 20th Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems
    May 2024
    708 pages
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 23 May 2024

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Confirmation Bias
    2. Heuristics
    3. Interactive Information Retrieval
    4. Search as Learning

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Funding Sources

    • Coordination of Superior Level Staff Improvement
    • National Council for Scientific and Technological Development

    Conference

    SBSI '24
    SBSI '24: XX Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems
    May 20 - 23, 2024
    Juiz de Fora, Brazil

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 181 of 557 submissions, 32%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 23
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)23
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
    Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media