Featured Snippets Comparison in Six European Languages

Marketing and Smart Technologies

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-33-4183-8_55

[Book Chapter]

Artur Strzelecki
University of Economics in Katowice
1 Maja 50, 40-287
Katowice, Poland
Paulina Rutecka
University of Economics in Katowice
1 Maja 50, 40-287
Katowice, Poland

Abstract:

This paper provides 743,798 keywords and results with featured snippets retrieved from the Google search engine. It presents a comparison of featured snippets displayed in six languages (English, Polish, German, Spanish, Italian, and French) in terms of snippets length, search query length, type of resulted snippet as paragraph, list, or table and top resulting domains for each country. It is found that keywords triggering featured snippets are most at two or three words long and snippets are mainly presented in the form of a paragraph. In each language, the most visible domain resulting with a direct answer was wikipedia.org.

Keywords:

Featured snippet; Google; Search engines; Direct answers

Full text:

PDF

How to cite:

Strzelecki, A., & Rutecka, P. (2021). Featured Snippets Comparison in Six European Languages. In Rocha Á., Reis J.L., Peter M.K., Cayolla R., Loureiro S., Bogdanović Z. (Eds.), Marketing and Smart Technologies (Vol. 205, pp. 687-697). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4183-8_55.

References:

  1. Trippas, J.R., Spina, D., Thomas, P., Sanderson, M., Joho, H., Cavedon, L.: Towards a model for spoken conversational search. Inf. Process. Manag. 57, 102162 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102162.
  2. Schubert, D.: Influence of Mobile-friendly Design to Search Results on Google Search. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 220, 424–433 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.517.
  3. Zhao, Y., Zhang, J., Xia, X., Le, T.: Evaluation of Google question-answering quality. Libr. Hi Tech. 37, 312–328 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-10-2017-0218.
  4. Rajaraman, A., Ullman, J.D.: Data Mining. In: Mining of Massive Datasets. pp. 1–17. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2011). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139058452.002.
  5. Stox, P.: 20 of Google’s limits you may not know exist, https://searchengineland.com/20-googles-limits-may-not-know-exist-281387.
  6. Strzelecki, A., Rutecka, P.: Direct Answers in Google Search Results. IEEE Access. 8, 103642–103654 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2999160.
  7. Strzelecki, A.: Google Web and Image Search Visibility Data for Online Store. Data. 4, 125 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/data4030125.
  8. Tsuei, H.-J., Tsai, W.-H., Pan, F.-T., Tzeng, G.-H.: Improving search engine optimization (SEO) by using hybrid modified MCDM models. Artif. Intell. Rev. 53, 1–16 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9644-0.
  9. Özkan, B., Özceylan, E., Kabak, M., Dağdeviren, M.: Evaluating the websites of academic departments through SEO criteria: a hesitant fuzzy linguistic MCDM approach. Artif. Intell. Rev. 53, 875–905 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-019-09681-z.
  10. Strzelecki, A., Rutecka, P.: The Snippets Taxonomy in Web Search Engines. In: Pańkowska, M. and Sandkuhl, K. (eds.) Perspectives in Business Informatics Research. pp. 177–188. Springer, Champagne, IL (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31143-8_13.
  11. Strzelecki, A., Rutecka, P.: Featured Snippets Results in Google Web Search: An Exploratory Study. In: Rocha, Á., Reis, J.L., Peter, M.K., and Bogdanović, Z. (eds.) Marketing and Smart Technologies. pp. 9–18. Springer Singapore (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1564-4_2.
  12. Zhang, S., Cabage, N.: Search Engine Optimization: Comparison of Link Building and Social Sharing. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 57, 148–159 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2016.1183447.
  13. Agichtein, E., Brill, E., Dumais, S.: Improving Web Search Ranking by Incorporating User Behavior Information. ACM SIGIR Forum. 52, 11–18 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3308774.3308778.
  14. Strzelecki, A.: Website removal from search engines due to copyright violation. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 71, 54–71 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0108.
  15. Dotson, J.P., Fan, R.R., Feit, E.M., Oldham, J.D., Yeh, Y.-H.: Brand Attitudes and Search Engine Queries. J. Interact. Mark. 37, 105–116 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.10.002.
  16. Egele, M., Kolbitsch, C., Platzer, C.: Removing web spam links from search engine results. J. Comput. Virol. 7, 51–62 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11416-009-0132-6.
  17. Miklosik, A.: Search engine marketing strategies: Google answer box-related search visibility factors. In: Carvalho, L. and Isaías, P. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship and Marketing for Global Reach in the Digital Economy. pp. 463–485. IGI Global, Hershey, PA (2019). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-6307-5.ch020.
  18. Killoran, J.B.: How to Use Search Engine Optimization Techniques to Increase Website Visibility. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 56, 50–66 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2012.2237255.
  19. Lurie, E., Mustafaraj, E.: Investigating the Effects of Google’s Search Engine Result Page in Evaluating the Credibility of Online News Sources. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Web Science - WebSci ’18. pp. 107–116. ACM, New York, NY (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3201064.3201095.
  20. Bilal, D., Huang, L.-M.: Readability and word complexity of SERPs snippets and web pages on children’s search queries. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 71, 241–259 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0124.
  21. Kattenbeck, M., Elsweiler, D.: Understanding credibility judgements for web search snippets. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 71, 368–391 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-07-2018-0181.
  22. Hu, D., Jiang, S., E. Robertson, R., Wilson, C.: Auditing the Partisanship of Google Search Snippets. In: The World Wide Web Conference on - WWW ’19. pp. 693–704. ACM, New York, NY (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313654.
  23. Marcos, M.-C., Gavin, F., Arapakis, I.: Effect of Snippets on User Experience in Web Search. In: Proceedings of the XVI International Conference on Human Computer Interaction - Interacción ’15. pp. 47:1-47:8. ACM, New York, NY (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2829875.2829916.
  24. Sachse, J.: The influence of snippet length on user behavior in mobile web search. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 71, 325–343 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-07-2018-0182.
  25. Maxwell, D., Azzopardi, L., Moshfeghi, Y.: A Study of Snippet Length and Informativeness. In: Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval - SIGIR ’17. pp. 135–144. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3077136.3080824.
  26. Kim, J., Thomas, P., Sankaranarayana, R., Gedeon, T., Yoon, H.-J.: What snippet size is needed in mobile web search? In: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Conference Human Information Interaction and Retrieval - CHIIR ’17. pp. 97–106. ACM, New York, NY (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3020165.3020173.
  27. Kacprzak, E., Koesten, L., Ibáñez, L.-D., Blount, T., Tennison, J., Simperl, E.: Characterising dataset search—An analysis of search logs and data requests. J. Web Semant. 55, 37–55 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2018.11.003.
  28. Wu, S.: Research on the application of spatial partial differential equation in user oriented information mining. Alexandria Eng. J. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.01.047.
  29. Nayak, P.: Understanding searches better than ever before, https://blog.google/products/search/search-language-understanding-bert.
  30. Chen, H., Luo, X.: An automatic literature knowledge graph and reasoning network modeling framework based on ontology and natural language processing. Adv. Eng. Informatics. 42, 100959 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2019.100959.