Effectiveness evaluation of generative intelligent search: a comparative study with traditional search engine

Purpose The emergence of generative artificial intelligence has transformed information retrieval, yet limited understanding of its differences from traditional search engines hinders clarity regarding changes in user search behavior and variations in search effectiveness, thereby impeding guidance for future search interface design. Design/methodology/approach We conducted a laboratory experiment comparing two versions of the Bing search engine: the traditional Bing search and the generative-AI integrated Bing (Bing Chat). We interpreted variations in user search behavior through querying, browsing, and clicking data, and established a multidimensional metric framework encompassing user, cost-benefit, and system dimensions to assess search effectiveness. 40 participants with good search skills completed the experiment, resulting in a final dataset comprising 160 observation records. Findings The Mann-Whitney U test revealed that users of generative AI search engines exhibited the following characteristics compared to those using traditional search engines: longer queries, more keyboard activity, more frequent query restructuring (including more narrowing queries, more following the system queries, and more changing the syntactic structure queries, with less broadening queries), more browsing during the first search session, and less scrolling and clicking. The results of the Linear Mixed Models show that, compared to traditional search engines, users achieve superior performance with generative AI search on users’ subjective perceptions and search efficiency metrics. Furthermore, we employed machine learning to validate which search behaviors can predict a user’s search effectiveness. The results indicate that the Gradient Boosting Machines are the optimal prediction models. The five most significant indicators for predicting search performance are Avelength. QueryConsTime, TimetofirSearch, ResViewTime and NumbofScroll. Research limitations/implications By revealing differences in user behavior and search efficiency across various search engines, this study deepens our understanding of generative AI search engines at a finer granularity and contributes to building adaptive search platforms capable of optimizing search recommendations. Originality/value By revealing differences in user behavior and efficiency between traditional and generative versions of the Bing search engine, this study deepens our understanding of generative AI search engines at a finer granularity and contributes to building adaptive search platforms capable of optimizing search recommendations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Aslib Journal of Information Management
Published
2026-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/ajim-01-2026-0032
Primary Topic
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Effectiveness evaluation of generative intelligent search: a comparative study with traditional search engine

Xubu Ma, Chunxiu Qin, Ruijia Zhang, Li Fan et al.
Aslib Journal of Information Management
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
article

Effectiveness evaluation of generative intelligent search: a comparative study with traditional search engine

Xubu Ma, Chunxiu Qin, Ruijia Zhang, Li Fan, Yulong Wang
article en

Abstract

Purpose The emergence of generative artificial intelligence has transformed information retrieval, yet limited understanding of its differences from traditional search engines hinders clarity regarding changes in user search behavior and variations in search effectiveness, thereby impeding guidance for future search interface design. Design/methodology/approach We conducted a laboratory experiment comparing two versions of the Bing search engine: the traditional Bing search and the generative-AI integrated Bing (Bing Chat). We interpreted variations in user search behavior through querying, browsing, and clicking data, and established a multidimensional metric framework encompassing user, cost-benefit, and system dimensions to assess search effectiveness. 40 participants with good search skills completed the experiment, resulting in a final dataset comprising 160 observation records. Findings The Mann-Whitney U test revealed that users of generative AI search engines exhibited the following characteristics compared to those using traditional search engines: longer queries, more keyboard activity, more frequent query restructuring (including more narrowing queries, more following the system queries, and more changing the syntactic structure queries, with less broadening queries), more browsing during the first search session, and less scrolling and clicking. The results of the Linear Mixed Models show that, compared to traditional search engines, users achieve superior performance with generative AI search on users’ subjective perceptions and search efficiency metrics. Furthermore, we employed machine learning to validate which search behaviors can predict a user’s search effectiveness. The results indicate that the Gradient Boosting Machines are the optimal prediction models. The five most significant indicators for predicting search performance are Avelength. QueryConsTime, TimetofirSearch, ResViewTime and NumbofScroll. Research limitations/implications By revealing differences in user behavior and search efficiency across various search engines, this study deepens our understanding of generative AI search engines at a finer granularity and contributes to building adaptive search platforms capable of optimizing search recommendations. Originality/value By revealing differences in user behavior and efficiency between traditional and generative versions of the Bing search engine, this study deepens our understanding of generative AI search engines at a finer granularity and contributes to building adaptive search platforms capable of optimizing search recommendations.

Aslib Journal of Information Management
Xidian University (CN)
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon