Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Information Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goh, D. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ang, R. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Are pay for performance search engines relevant?

Dion H. Goh

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, ashlgoh{at}ntu.edu.sg

Rebecca P. Ang

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Pay for performance (PFP) search engines, like their ‘traditional’ counterparts (e.g. Google), provide search services for documents on the World Wide Web. These search engines, however, rank documents not on content characteristics but according to the amount of money a vendor is willing to pay when a user visits a web site appearing in the search results page. A study was conducted to compare the retrieval effectiveness of Overture (formerly GoTo, a PFP search engine) and Google (a traditional search engine) from an academic perspective. Thirty-one queries from different graduate-level subject areas were submitted to each of these search services and the first 20 documents returned were retrieved and analysed for precision and distribution of relevant documents using different relevancy criteria. Results indicate that Google outperformed Overture in both categories. Implications of this study are also discussed.

Journal of Information Science, Vol. 28, No. 5, 349-355 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/016555150202800501
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?