skip to main content
10.1145/1772690.1772721acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Competing for users' attention: on the interplay between organic and sponsored search results

Published:26 April 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Queries on major Web search engines produce complex result pages, primarily composed of two types of information: organic results, that is, short descriptions and links to relevant Web pages, and sponsored search results, the small textual advertisements often displayed above or to the right of the organic results. Strategies for optimizing each type of result in isolation and the consequent user reaction have been extensively studied; however, the interplay between these two complementary sources of information has been ignored, a situation we aim to change. Our findings indicate that their perceived relative usefulness (as evidenced by user clicks) depends on the nature of the query. Specifically, we found that, when both sources focus on the same intent, for navigational queries there is a clear competition between ads and organic results, while for non-navigational queries this competition turns into synergy.

We also investigate the relationship between the perceived usefulness of the ads and their textual similarity to the organic results, and propose a model that formalizes this relationship. To this end, we introduce the notion of responsive ads, which directly address the user's information need, and incidental ads, which are only tangentially related to that need. Our findings support the hypothesis that in the case of navigational queries, which are usually fully satisfied by the top organic result, incidental ads are perceived as more valuable than responsive ads, which are likely to be duplicative. On the other hand, in the case of non-navigational queries, incidental ads are perceived as less beneficial, possibly because they diverge too far from the actual user need.

We hope that our findings and further research in this area will allow search engines to tune ad selection for an increased synergy between organic and sponsored results, leading to both higher user satisfaction and better monetization.

References

  1. D. Agarwal, A. Z. Broder, D. Chakrabarti, D. Diklic, V. Josifovski, and M. Sayyadian. Estimating rates of rare events at multiple resolutions. In KDD, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. E. Agichtein, E. Brill, and S. Dumais. Improving web search ranking by incorporating user behavior information. InSIGIR '06: Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 19--26, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Broder. A taxonomy of web search. SIGIR Forum, 36, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. A. Broder, P. Ciccolo, M. Fontoura, E. Gabrilovich, V. Josifovski, and L. Riedel. Search advertising using Web relevance feedback. InCIKM'08, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. O. Chapelle and Y. Zhang. A dynamic bayesian network click model for web search ranking. InWWW '09: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web, pages 1--10, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. H. Chen and D. R. Karger. Less is more: probabilistic models for retrieving fewer relevant documents. InSIGIR '06: Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 429--436, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. N. Craswell, O. Zoeter, M. Taylor, and B. Ramsey. An experimental comparison of click position-bias models. InWSDM '08: Proceedings of the international conference on Websearch and web data mining, pages 87--94, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. G. E. Dupret and B. Piwowarski. A user browsing model to predict search engine click data from past observations. InSIGIR '08: Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACMSIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 331--338, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. B. Edelman, M. Ostrovsky, and M. Schwarz. Internet advertising and the generalized second price auction: Selling billions of dollars worth of keywords. American Economic Review, 97(1):242--259, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. D. Fain and J. Pedersen. Sponsored search: A brief history. InSecond Workshop on Sponsored Search Auctions, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. S. Gollapudi and A. Sharma. An axiomatic approach for result diversification. In18th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2009), April 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. B. Jansen and M. Resnick. Examining searcher perceptions of and interactions with sponsored results. InWorkshop on Sponsored Search Auctions, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. T. Joachims. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. InKDD '02: Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 133--142, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. T. Joachims, L. Granka, B. Pan, H. Hembrooke, and G. Gay. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback.InSIGIR '05: Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 154--161, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. L. Lorigo, M. Haridasan, H. Brynjarsdottir, L. Xia, T. Joachims, G. Gay, L. Granka, F. Pellacini, and B. Pan. Eye tracking and online search: Lessons learned and challenges ahead. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 59(7):1041--1052, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. M. Regelson and D. Fain. Predicting click-through rate using keyword clusters. InSecond Workshop on Sponsored Search Auctions, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. M. Richardson, E. Dominowska, and R. Ragno. Predicting clicks: Estimating the click-through rate for new ads. InWWW'07. ACM Press, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. A. Swaminathan, C. Mathew, and D. Kirovski. Alta vista invites advertisers to pay for top ranking. InTechnical Report MSR-TR-2008-015, Microsoft Research, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. N. Y. Times. Alta vista invites advertisers to pay for top ranking. http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/04/biztech/articles/15online.html, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Competing for users' attention: on the interplay between organic and sponsored search results

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    ePub

    View this article in ePub.

    View ePub