Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

ABSTRACT

There is growing recognition that the paradigms of modern scholarship are shifting with the advent of the World Wide Web and other Internet-based forums. In some specialty areas within the discipline of Information Technology, one frequently hears folkloric wisdom suggesting that the turn-around time for print publication is greater than the useful longevity of the content. This situation increasing pushes the consumer of state-of-the art research toward the web rather than to the library. At some universities the problem of evaluating the quality of peer-reviewed literature has been approached through "citation" data. How often is a given work cited, for example, in Science Citation Abstracts? For evaluating web-based research, we suggest a related criterion for evaluating the "eminence" of scholarship. As of February 2003 [1], Google moved into first place as the most popular search engine in the United States. Google's immediate upsurge in popularity is generally attributed to the observation that its searches tend to reveal desired results. This is probably due to the nature of Google's page evaluation methodology. The relevance of a page to a given query is based on the number of other pages using those query terms that provide hyperlinks to the page in question. Since Google's emergence, other search engines have begun to utilize allied methodologies - essentially bootstrapping on existing works as relevance indicators in ways that, in fact, provide at least one form of "citation data." This paper will examine some related methodologies for evaluating quality of web-based academic work, and will examine some of the potential strengths and pitfalls associated with such methods.

REFERENCES

• 1: Sullivan, Danny, 2003. Nielsen NetRatings Search Engine Ratings. SearchEngineWatch.com. (Feb. 25, 2003). DOI= http://searchenginewatch.com/reports/article.php/2156451.
• 2: Arms, William A., 2002. Quality Control in Scholarly Publishing on the Web. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, August, 2002, Volume 8, Issue 1 ISSN 1080-2711. DOI= http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/08-01/arms.html.
• 3: Shankland, Stephen. 2008. Google tweaked search 450 times in 2007. CNET News, (April 17, 2008). DOI= http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9921148-7.html.
• 4: RustyBrick ®, Inc., 2007. Ask.com To Launch New Search Algorithm Code Named Edison. Search Engine Roundtable April 12, 2007. publ. RustyBrick ®, Inc. Web Development. DOI= http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/013086.html.
• 5: Wall, Aaron. 2006. How Search Engines Work: Search Engine Relevancy Reviewed. SEOBook.com, (June 13, 2006) DOI= http://www.seobook.com/relevancy/
• 6: Google Terms of Service. Google Inc. July, 2008. DOI= http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS?hl=en.
• 7: Yahoo! Terms of Service. Yahoo! Inc. July, 2008. DOI= http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/utos-173.html.
• 8: Google Inc. 2003. "Our Technology" Oct. 2003. DOI= http://www.google.com/technology/index.html.
• 9: Google, Inc. 2008. Corporate Information: Technology Overview. July 2008. DOI= http://www.google.com/corporate/tech.html.
• 10: Yahoo! Inc.2008. How are web documements ranked? http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/search/ranking/ranking-01.html
• 11: Google Search. 2008. Wikipedia. July 2008. DOI= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_search
• 12: Fan, Jennifer and Bausch, Suzy. Online searches grow 55 percent YOY to nearly 5.1 billion searches. Nielsen/NetRatings, Inc. February 9, 2006 DOI= http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/pr/pr_060209.pdf.
• 13: Bausch, Suzy and McGiboney, Michelle. 2008. Nielsen Online Announces May U.S. Search Share Rankings Nielsen/NetRatings, Inc. June 19, 2008 DOI= http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/pr/pr_080619V.pdf
• 14: Maddick, Jeremy. 2006. MSN Search Algorithm. SEO Tips. Published by WealthStream Innovations. DOI= http://www.seomix.com/msn-search-algorithm/
• 15: Porter, Wayne. 2006. Gaming the Microsoft Search Engine Algorithm - How It Was Done. ReveNews Online Revenue News & Opinions Since 1998. July 13th, 2006. DOI=http://www.revenews.com/wayneporter/gaming-the-microsoft-search-engine-algorithm-how-it-was-done/
• 16: Johnson, Mark. 2008. Microsoft to Acquire Powerset 32. Powerset Blog. Johnson July 1, 2008. DOI= http://www.powerset.com/blog/articles/2008/07/01/microsoft-to-acquire-powerset
• 17: Baker Lauren. 2007. Google Drops PageRank For Many Sites: Paid Links or New Algorithm? Search Engine Journal. October 24th, 2007. DOI= http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-drops-pagerank-for-many-sites-paid-links-or-new-algorithm/5890/
• 18: Zusne, L., & Dailey, D. P. (1982). History of psychology texts as measuring instruments of eminence in psychology. Revista de Historia de la Psycologia 1982, 3, 7--4
• 19: Alejandro M. Diaz. Through the Google Goggles: Sociopolitical Bias in Search Engine Design. Honors Thesis, Stanford University, 2005. DOI= http://epl.scu.edu:16080/~stsvalues/readings/Diaz_thesis_final.pdf.
• 20: Lessig, Lawrence. 2004. Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 2004.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  A. General Literature
  A.m MISCELLANEOUS

General Terms:
Human Factors, Measurement, Reliability

Keywords:
methodology, peer-review, research, scholarship, web-based