Search is the New Black: How Millennials Find Information Online

Miranda HuntUser Research GroupEBSCO Information ServicesBoston UXPAMay 15, 2015

Introduction

This talk will discuss how college-age users find information in the digital age. It’s based on a combination of our own primary research and secondary research.

We will be examining what they actually do when they set out to find information, as well as how to provide a user experience that will support them in their online activities.

What we’ll talk about

What design features help (or hinder) students’ online search activities, and how can interface design support students in their online tasks?

What do we know about this group of users?

How does this group find information online? What are their expectations?

What roles do the search box and results page play?

01

02

03

04

Characteristics of Millennials

Digital natives … NOT technology wizards.

• This group avoids web elements that are perceived as unknown for fear of wasting time.

• They don’t like to learn new interface styles…they prefer well-known

interaction patterns.

• If they don’t perceive an immediate payoff for their efforts, they won’t:

– click on a link– fix an error– read detailed instructions

From College Students on the Web (Loranger, McCloskey, Nielsen)

What else do we know?

• They are self-service, and they have a great deal of confidence in their ability to do it on their own.

• They expect technology of every sort to work “properly” at all times.

• They are search dominant.

How do Millennials search for information online?

“Google knows exactly the kind of thing I am looking for.”

--Rice University student

Students almost always start their online searches on Google, and they often do

“presearch” on Wikipedia.

What do they do on web pages?

When using other websites, users in this group expect a search box…and they almost always start with it.

BUT students don’t understand how to construct search queries, and they don’t understand how to employ advanced search.

This group has been trained by

• They expect a Google-type interface and Google-type results sorting/ranking.

• If they can’t find what they’re looking for, they assume their search is flawed and try again. Or, they decide there’s nothing “out there” and give up.

• They put complete trust in the ranking of the search results, and…

…they don’t go past the first page.

Search behavior

• They almost always use simple keyword searches.

• They don’t want to have to make too many decisions.

• They are fearful of limiting their search results too much and tend not to use all the filters offered.

Poor search tactics = Poor results

• Foraging• Google dependence• Reliance on single search strategy• Habitual topic-changing• Overuse of natural language and search

stringing

Problems associated with search tactics employed by students

• Students are de facto “outsourcing” much of the evaluation process to the search engine itself.

• Too many, or too few, results.

The results page

• They only look at the first page, usually only the first few results.

• They skim the page…no detailed reading is happening here.

• They are looking for their keywords in the result titles.

• They are trusting the search engine to provide them with what they’re looking for.

So, to recap:

What do Millennials actually DO when searching for information online?

Search tactics and the search box

• They go to Google first.• They almost exclusively use the search box on

web pages.• They use keyword search, with an over-

reliance on exploratory queries and natural language.

The results page

• They scan for their keywords in titles in the results, and make a decision about relevance within seconds.

• They start a new search from the results page, rather than clicking past the first page of results.

• They revise their search terms repeatedly to get the results they want.

Image holder

Now what?

• Search: Make it work.

– NN/g: “Design the search box to be painfully recognizable”. Include a simple search box on the top of every page.

• Make sure results are relevant and ranked appropriately. Search algorithms should support student behavior and lead students to the information they’re after.

Additional search recommendations

Allow for typos and spelling errors. Provide search suggestions.

Repeat the user’s query in an editable search box.

Make search filters simple.

What else?

Other design recommendations:

– Keep websites simple, clean, and easy to scan.– Don’t try to be cute or fancy.– Follow established models for site navigation.– Watch tone and reading level.

https://readability-score.com/

Easy search + Smart results = a place in the Millennial digital domain

Be in touch!

mhunt@ebsco.comOn Twitter:

@miranda_elizah

Bibliography• Asher, A. (2011). Search Magic: Discovering How Undergraduates Locate

Information. Paper Presentation, American Anthropological Association Annual Meeting.

• Asher, A., Duke, L., & Wilson, S. (2013). Paths of Discovery: Comparing the Search Effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and Conventional Library Resources. College & Research Libraries, 74(5), 464-488.

• Bloom, B. S., & Deyrup, M. (2012). The Truth Is Out: How Students REALLY Search. Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference.

• Dalal, H. A., Kimura, A. K., Hofmann, M. A. (2015). Searching in the Wild: Observing Information-Seeking Behavior in a Discovery Tool. American Library Association.

• Foster, N. F., & Gibbons, S. L. (Eds.). (2007). Studying students: The undergraduate research project at the University of Rochester. Assoc of Cllge & Rsrch Libr.

• Foster, N.F. (Ed.) (2014). Participatory Design in Academic Libraries: New Reports and Findings. Council on Library and Information Resources.

• Loranger, H., McCloskey, M., & Nielsen, J. College Students (Ages 18-24) on the Web. 2nd Edition.