IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/doi10.1086-734801.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Important Are User-Generated Data for Search Result Quality?

Author

Listed:
  • Tobias J. Klein
  • Madina Kurmangaliyeva
  • Jens Prüfer
  • Patricia Prüfer

Abstract

Do search engines produce better results because their algorithms are better or because they can access more data from past searches? We document that the algorithm of a small search engine can produce nonpersonalized results that are of similar quality to those of the dominant firm (Google) for certain types of search queries. Overall differences in the quality of search results are explained by searches for rare queries, which constitute 74 percent of the traffic in our data. We conduct an experiment in which we keep the algorithm of a small search engine fixed and only vary the amount of data it uses as input. Our results show that giving small search engines access to more data about rare queries improves the quality of their results. This suggests that mandatory data sharing by large search engines is a necessary condition, yet probably not a sufficient one, to increase competition in the search market.

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias J. Klein & Madina Kurmangaliyeva & Jens Prüfer & Patricia Prüfer, 2025. "How Important Are User-Generated Data for Search Result Quality?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 68(3), pages 499-518.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/734801
    DOI: 10.1086/734801
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/734801
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/734801
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/734801?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/734801. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.