This is a talk by Brynn Evans and Ed Chi, given at CSCW 2008 in the Social Sensemaking session.

1. Photo Credit: David Wild
Towards a Model of
Understanding Social Search
Brynn M. Evans Ed H. Chi
UC San Diego PARC
CSCW 2008 bmevans@cogsci.ucsd.edu echi@parc.com Nov 11, 2008

2. Photo Credit: Image Source

3. Search is more than a
database query.

4. Janet’s extended search process
BEFORE had partial knowledge,
needed specific information
DURING Google
AFTER shared information
with colleagues

5. Search can be social.

6. What is social search?

7. social search : an umbrella term used to describe
search acts that make use of
social interactions with others.

8. social search : an umbrella term used to describe
search acts that make use of
social interactions with others.
Where those interactions may be:
• explicit or implicit,
TWIDALE; MORRIS GLANCE; GOLDBERG; RIEDL; SMYTH
• co-located or remote,
KUHLTHAU; TWIDALE; WILSON
• synchronous or asynchronous.

9. What are we trying to do?
goal : Learn about the role of
social interactions in search.
method : Analyze 150 responses to a
critical-incident survey. (F
LANAGAN 1954)

10. The Survey
Mechanical Turk -- micro-task market
(KITTUR, CHI & SUH, 2008)
27-question critical-incident questionnaire
on people’s most recent search experience.

11. The Survey
We sought the context and purpose of the search experience.

12. The Survey
We sought the context and purpose of the search experience.
BEFORE
DURING
AFTER

13. The Survey
We sought the context and purpose of the search experience.
• when did the episode occur?
BEFORE • what were you doing before the search?
• did you talk with anyone prior to searching?
DURING
AFTER

14. The Survey
We sought the context and purpose of the search experience.
• when did the episode occur?
BEFORE • what were you doing before the search?
• did you talk with anyone prior to searching?
DURING • what steps did you take in your search?
• did you interact with anyone?
AFTER

15. The Survey
We sought the context and purpose of the search experience.
• when did the episode occur?
BEFORE • what were you doing before the search?
• did you talk with anyone prior to searching?
DURING • what steps did you take in your search?
• did you interact with anyone?
• what did you do immediately after?
AFTER
• did you share your results with anyone?

16. Subject Sample
• N = 150
• Anonymous, English-speaking users
• diverse backgrounds
Profession Employer
9% Education Universities (London, Illinois, Missouri, Northeastern)
9% Financial Liberty Mutual, Ernst & Young
7% Healthcare ChartOne Inc, Mid State Health Systems
6% Govt. Agency IRS, US Army, Navy, Air Force, Dept of Commerce
6% Software Oracle, EA Games
6% Retail Target, Circuit City
5% Research LexisNexis, GE Plastics

17. Subject Sample
• N = 150
• Anonymous, English-speaking users
• diverse backgrounds
Profession Employer
9% Education Universities (London, Illinois, Missouri, Northeastern)
9% Financial Liberty Mutual, Ernst & Young
7% Healthcare ChartOne Inc, Mid State Health Systems
6% Govt. Agency IRS, US Army, Navy, Air Force, Dept of Commerce
6% Software Oracle, EA Games
6% Retail Target, Circuit City
5% Research LexisNexis, GE Plastics

18. Subject Sample
• N = 150
• Anonymous, English-speaking users
• diverse backgrounds
Profession Employer
9% Education Universities (London, Illinois, Missouri, Northeastern)
9% Financial Liberty Mutual, Ernst & Young
7% Healthcare ChartOne Inc, Mid State Health Systems
6% Govt. Agency IRS, US Army, Navy, Air Force, Dept of Commerce
6% Software Oracle, EA Games
6% Retail Target, Circuit City
5% Research LexisNexis, GE Plastics

19. Subject Sample
• N = 150
• Anonymous, English-speaking users
• diverse backgrounds
Profession Employer
9% Education Universities (London, Illinois, Missouri, Northeastern)
9% Financial Liberty Mutual, Ernst & Young
7% Healthcare ChartOne Inc, Mid State Health Systems
6% Govt. Agency IRS, US Army, Navy, Air Force, Dept of Commerce
6% Software Oracle, EA Games
6% Retail Target, Circuit City
5% Research LexisNexis, GE Plastics

20. Subject Sample
• N = 150
• Anonymous, English-speaking users
• diverse backgrounds
Profession Employer
9% Education Universities (London, Illinois, Missouri, Northeastern)
9% Financial Liberty Mutual, Ernst & Young
7% Healthcare ChartOne Inc, Mid State Health Systems
6% Govt. Agency IRS, US Army, Navy, Air Force, Dept of Commerce
6% Software Oracle, EA Games
6% Retail Target, Circuit City
5% Research LexisNexis, GE Plastics

21. Model of Search

22. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

23. Before Search
externally-motivated self-motivated framing
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

24. externally-motivated searchers
specific request from a boss,
customer, or client

25. externally-motivated searchers
specific request from a boss,
customer, or client
Photo Credit: tuexperto_com5

26. externally-motivated searchers self-motivated searchers
specific request from a boss, self-initiated search for personal or
customer, or client work related information
Photo Credit: tuexperto_com5

27. externally-motivated searchers self-motivated searchers
specific request from a boss, self-initiated search for personal or
customer, or client work related information
Photo Credit: tuexperto_com5
Photo Source: Peter Voerman

28. Before Search
externally-
framing motivated self-motivated
the context users users
31% 69%
search
preparation

29. Before Search
externally-
framing motivated self-motivated
the context users users
31% 69%
GATHER REQUIREMENTS
refining the
requirements
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION

30. Before Search
externally-
framing motivated self-motivated
the context users users
31% 69%
GATHER REQUIREMENTS SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
refining the
requirements
43% users
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION

31. Before Search
externally-
framing motivated self-motivated
the context users users
70%
31% 30%
69% SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
GATHER REQUIREMENTS SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
refining the
requirements
43% users
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION

32. Before Search
framing externally-motivated self-motivated
the context users users
70% 30% SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
refining the GATHER REQUIREMENTS
requirements
43% users
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION
REASONS
FOR
BEING
SOCIAL

33. Before Search
framing externally-motivated self-motivated
the context users users
70% 30% SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
refining the GATHER REQUIREMENTS
requirements
43% users
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION
externally-
REASONS motivated
FOR 1. establish guidelines
BEING
SOCIAL

34. Before Search
framing externally-motivated self-motivated
the context users users
70% 30% SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
refining the GATHER REQUIREMENTS
requirements
43% users
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION
externally- self-motivated
REASONS motivated
FOR 1. establish guidelines 1. establish guidelines
BEING 2. seek advice
3. brainstorm
SOCIAL
4. collect search tips (e.g., keywords, URLs)

35. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

36. During Search
3 types of information needs (BRODER 2002)

37. During Search
3 types of information needs (BRODER 2002)
navigational 28%
step A
step B
Photo Credit: Library of Congress via pingnews

38. During Search
3 types of information needs (BRODER 2002)
navigational 28% transactional 13%
step A step A
step B step B
TRANSACTION
Photo Credit: Library of Congress via pingnews Photo Credit: Jeremy Goldman

39. During Search
3 types of information needs
informational 59%
FORAGING
search
process
“evidence file”
SENSEMAKING
Photo Credit: Children at Risk Foundation

40. During Search
3 types of information needs
informational 40%
FORAGING SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
search
process
“evidence file”
SENSEMAKING
Photo Credit: Children at Risk Foundation

41. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

42. After Search
search product / end product

43. After Search
search product / end product
28%
DO NOTHING

44. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING

45. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING
ORGANIZE

46. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users

47. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users

48. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users
to proximate 87%
86 to public 2%
2
others users others users

49. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users
to proximate 87%
86 to public 2%
2 to self 15%
15
others users others users users

50. After Search
search product / end product
72% 28%
TAKE ACTION DO NOTHING
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users
to proximate 87%
86 to public 2%
2 to self 15%
15
others users others users users
59% of all users shared information with others

51. After Search
DISTRIBUTE 67% of all users
to proximate 87%
86 to public 2%
2 to self 15%
15
others users others users users
59% of all users shared information with others
externally- self-motivated
REASONS motivated
FOR
1. obligation 1. obligation
SHARING 2. thought others would be interested
3. to get feedback

52. Limitations
What does it mean to be an active social searcher?
What considerations go into seeking help from social networks?
Is social search more useful for certain types of info?
Procedural knowledge? Experience-based knowledge?
How is the experience different for search failures?
Will we see more cases of social outreach during failed searches?
Will searchers exploit all options before admitting failure?

53. Conclusion

54. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

55. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

56. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
reasons for interacting: to get advice, guidelines, feedback,
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
or search tips
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
process
step B step B
“evidence file”
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

57. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
reasons for interacting: to get advice, guidelines, feedback,
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
or search tips
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
3 types of search: informational search provides a
step B step B
process
compelling case for social file”
“evidence search support.
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

58. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
reasons for interacting: to get advice, guidelines, feedback,
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
or search tips
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
3 types of search: informational search provides a
step B step B
process
compelling case for social file”
“evidence search support.
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
59% users engaged in post-search sharing.
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
to self 15% to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

59. externally-motivated self-motivated framing
Before Search
searchers searchers the context
31% 69%
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
43% users engaged in pre-search social interactions.
GATHER REQUIREMENTS refining
the
reasons for interacting: to get advice, guidelines, feedback,
FORMULATE REPRESENTATION requirements
or search tips
28% 13% 59%
During Search
navigational transactional informational
FORAGING
step A step A search
3 types of search: informational search provides a
step B step B
process
compelling case for social file”
“evidence search support.
TRANSACTION SENSEMAKING
search product /end product
After Search
28% 72%
DO NOTHING TAKE ACTION
59% users engaged in post-search sharing.
ORGANIZE DISTRIBUTE
reasons for interacting: thought others might be interested,
to self 15% feedback, out of obligation
to get to proximate 87% to public 2%
others others

60. Design Principles

61. Before Search,
users need: access resources during preparation
• instant messaging (IM) access
to friends near the search box
Photo Credit: Jeff Hester

62. Before Search,
users need: access resources during preparation
• instant messaging (IM) access
to friends near the search box
Photo Credit: Jeff Hester
During Search,
users need: help evaluating & validating results
• related keywords or search trails
Similar to: GLANCE; SMYTH
• tag clouds from domain experts
Photo Credit: Rooney John

63. Before Search,
users need: access resources during preparation
• instant messaging (IM) access
to friends near the search box
Photo Credit: Jeff Hester
During Search,
users need: help evaluating & validating results MR. TAGGY
• related keywords or search trails
Similar to: GLANCE; SMYTH
• tag clouds from domain experts
Photo Credit: Rooney John

64. Before Search,
users need: access resources during preparation
• instant messaging (IM) access
to friends near the search box
Photo Credit: Jeff Hester
During Search,
users need: help evaluating & validating results MR. TAGGY
• related keywords or search trails
Similar to: GLANCE; SMYTH
• tag clouds from domain experts
Photo Credit: Rooney John
After Search,
users need: facilities for sharing search findings SPARTAG.US (PARC)
• sharing tools built-in to the site or
search page

65. Photo Credit: Image Source

66. Thank You!
Brynn M. Evans Ed H. Chi
bmevans@gmail.com echi@parc.com
http://brynnevans.com http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~echi/