ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Impact of search engines on page popularity
Full text PdfPdf (172 KB)
Source International World Wide Web Conference archive
Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web table of contents
New York, NY, USA
SESSION: Search engineering 1 table of contents
Pages: 20 - 29  
Year of Publication: 2004
ISBN:1-58113-844-X
Authors
Junghoo Cho  University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
Sourashis Roy  University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
Sponsor
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 20,   Downloads (12 Months): 225,   Citation Count: 34
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/988672.988676
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Recent studies show that a majority of Web page accesses are referred by search engines. In this paper we study the widespread use of Web search engines and its impact on the ecology of the Web. In particular, we study how much impact search engines have on the popularity evolution of Web pages. For example, given that search engines return currently popular" pages at the top of search results, are we somehow penalizing newly created pages that are not very well known yet? Are popular pages getting even more popular and new pages completely ignored? We first show that this unfortunate trend indeed exists on the Web through an experimental study based on real Web data. We then analytically estimate how much longer it takes for a new page to attract a large number of Web users when search engines return only popular pages at the top of search results. Our result shows that search engines can have an immensely worrisome impact on the discovery of new Web pages.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
R. Albert, A.-L. Barabasi, and H. Jeong. Diameter of the World Wide Web. Nature, 401(6749):130--131, September 1999.
 
3
A.-L. Barabasi and R. Albert. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286(5439):509--512, October 1999.
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
J. Cho and R. E. Adams. Page quality: In search of an unbiased web ranking. Technical report, UCLA Computer Science Department, November 2003.
 
9
 
10
B. D. Davison. Web traffic logs: An imperfect resource for evaluation. In Ninth Annual Conference of the Internet Society (INET'99), pages 22--25, June 1999.
 
11
F. Douglis, A. Feldmann, and B. Krishnamurthy. Rate of change and other metrics: a live study of the world wide web. In Proceedings of the Second USENIX Symposium on Internetworking Technologies and Systems, October 1999.
12
 
13
Google information for webmasters. Available at http://www.google.com/webmasters/.
 
14
 
15
B. A. Huberman, P. Pirolli, J. Pitkow, and R. M. Lukose. Strong regularities in world wide web surfing. Science, 280(5360):95--97, April 1998.
16
 
17
J. Kleinberg, R. Kumar, P. Raghavan, S. Rajagopalan, and A. Tomkins. The web as a graph: measurements, models, and methods. In International Conference on Combinatorics and Computing, 1999.
18
 
19
Nielsen netratings search engine ratings. Brief summary is available athttp://searchenginewatch.com/reports/article.php/2156451, February 2003.
 
20
S. Olsen. Does search engine's power threaten web's independence? Available at http://news.com.com/2009-1023963618.html, October 2002.
 
21
L. Page, S. Brin, R. Motwani, and T. Winograd. The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Technical report, Stanford University Database Group, 1998. Available at http://dbpubs.stanford.edu:8090/pub/1999-66.
 
22
D. M. Pennock, G. W. Flake, S. Lawrence, E. J. Glover, and C. L. Giles. Winners don't take all: Characterizing the competition for links on the web. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(8):5207--5211, 2002.
23
 
24
25

CITED BY  34

Collaborative Colleagues:
Junghoo Cho: colleagues
Sourashis Roy: colleagues