In my previous article Scholarly searching gets Googled, Spaced, and CrossRef'd I highlighted some of the alliances Google is apparently building and some of the concerns being raised by some 'information professionals' about whether Google should be considered a legitimate part of a scholar's toolkit. Today, I give a brief account of an interesting test that was recently carried out by the UK Guardian newspaper. It would be be neat to see this replicated under more 'scientific' conditions. Take three people place one in front of a computer with Google access, the second only has a phone, the third is placed in a library. Give them each the same six questions and start the clock. The questions were:
- List the titles of all books written by Piers Morgan, editor of the Daily Mirror.
- Where and when did Margaret Thatcher say: “There is no such thing as society”?
- Who is the vice-chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on back pain?
- What proportion of the Slovene railway system is electrified?
- What did Sophie and Edward Wessex do on Tuesday?
- What was unusual about the British gold medal victory in the 400m in the 1908 Olympics in London?
Just in case you like such challenges and would like to run the test for yourself I won't display the Guardian's results in this article.
But for those who just can't wait the results can be found in this associated article.
I would want to constrain the context a little more than the Guardian did. Let's imagine someone at home or in a workplace or study space where there is no easy access to an extensive reference works or where it's not possible (or it's too expensive) to phone a mentor or friends. Many students don't fit the convenient stereotype of the campus-based, full-time, and with easy access to libraries or learning centres. For them, search engines, portals, and aggregators are critical parts of their toolkit. As long a Google and the like can provide them with access to what they require then they'll use it. As my previous article illustrated, Google appears to be responding to the quality assured information resources argument … if only it wasn't clouded by the unknown long-term consequences of that flotation?
