Market or Markets? Investigating Google Search's Market Shares Under Horizontal and Vertical Segmentation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.11918v1
• Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 17:09:55 GMT
• Title: Market or Markets? Investigating Google Search's Market Shares Under Horizontal and Vertical Segmentation
• Authors: Desheng Hu, Muhammad Abu Bakar Aziz, Jeffrey Gleason, Alice Koeninger, Nikolas Guggenberger, Ronald E. Robertson, Christo Wilson,
• Abstract summary: We present the first analysis of Google Search's market share under both horizontal and vertical segmentation of online search. We observe that Google Search receives 71.8% of participants' queries when compared to other horizontal search engines. Our results inform the consequential and ongoing debates about the market power of Google Search and the conceptualization of online markets in general.
• Score: 4.945772101603344
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Is Google Search a monopoly with gatekeeping power? Regulators from the US, UK, and Europe have argued that it is based on the assumption that Google Search dominates the market for horizontal (a.k.a. "general") web search. Google disputes this, claiming that competition extends to all vertical (a.k.a. "specialized") search engines, and that under this market definition it does not have monopoly power. In this study we present the first analysis of Google Search's market share under both horizontal and vertical segmentation of online search. We leverage observational trace data collected from a panel of US residents that includes their web browsing history and copies of the Google Search Engine Result Pages they were shown. We observe that Google Search receives 71.8% of participants' queries when compared to other horizontal search engines, and that participants' search sessions begin at Google greater than 50% of the time in 24 out of 30 vertical market segments (which comprise almost all of our participants' searches). Our results inform the consequential and ongoing debates about the market power of Google Search and the conceptualization of online markets in general.

Related papers

• The enshittification of online search? Privacy and quality of Google, Bing and Apple in coding advice [1.8528929583956726]
  We evaluate the search quality of Google Search, Microsoft Bing, and Apple Search.<n>We use two independent metrics of search quality: 1) the number of trackers on the first search result, as a measure of privacy in web search, and 2) the average rank of the first Stack Overflow search result.<n>Our results suggest that the privacy of search results is higher on Bing than on Google and Apple. Similarly, the quality of coding advice -- as measured by the average rank of Stack Overflow -- was highest on Bing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-03T13:42:22Z)
• Implicit Search via Discrete Diffusion: A Study on Chess [104.74301574891359]
  We propose DiffuSearch, a model that does textitimplicit search by looking into the future world via discrete diffusion modeling. We instantiate DiffuSearch on a classical board game, Chess, where explicit search is known to be essential. We show DiffuSearch outperforms both the searchless and explicit search-enhanced policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T06:25:15Z)
• Auditing Google's Search Algorithm: Measuring News Diversity Across Brazil, the UK, and the US [0.0]
  This study examines the influence of Google's search algorithm on news diversity by analyzing search results in Brazil, the UK, and the US. It explores how Google's system preferentially favors a limited number of news outlets. Findings indicate a slight leftward bias in search outcomes and a preference for popular, often national outlets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T11:49:16Z)
• Exploring Query Understanding for Amazon Product Search [62.53282527112405]
  We study how query understanding-based ranking features influence the ranking process. We propose a query understanding-based multi-task learning framework for ranking. We present our studies and investigations using the real-world system on Amazon Search.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-05T03:33:11Z)
• A comparison of online search engine autocompletion in Google and Baidu [3.5016560416031886]
  We study the characteristics of search auto-completions in two different linguistic and cultural contexts: Baidu and Google. We find differences between the two search engines in the way they suppress or modify original queries. Our study highlights the need for more refined, culturally sensitive moderation strategies in current language technologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-03T08:17:04Z)
• Google's Chrome Antitrust Paradox [14.631958152016749]
  We argue that Chrome is instrumental in Google's strategy to reinforce its dominance in online advertising, publishing, and the browser market itself. We examine how Chrome not only bolsters Google's position in advertising and publishing through practices such as coercion, and self-preferencing, it also helps leverage its advertising clout to engage in a "pay-to-play" paradigm. We propose a triad of solutions motivated from our analysis of Google's abuse of Chrome.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T20:41:26Z)
• Identifying key players in dark web marketplaces [58.720142291102135]
  This paper aims to identify the key players in Bitcoin transaction networks linked to dark markets. We show that a large fraction of the traded volume is concentrated in a small group of elite market participants. Our findings suggest that understanding the behavior of key players in dark web marketplaces is critical to effectively disrupting illegal activities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T20:30:43Z)
• Evaluating Verifiability in Generative Search Engines [70.59477647085387]
  Generative search engines directly generate responses to user queries, along with in-line citations. We conduct human evaluation to audit four popular generative search engines. We find that responses from existing generative search engines are fluent and appear informative, but frequently contain unsupported statements and inaccurate citations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-19T17:56:12Z)
• Tree-based Text-Vision BERT for Video Search in Baidu Video Advertising [58.09698019028931]
  How to pair the video ads with the user search is the core task of Baidu video advertising. Due to the modality gap, the query-to-video retrieval is much more challenging than traditional query-to-document retrieval. We present a tree-based combo-attention network (TCAN) which has been recently launched in Baidu's dynamic video advertising platform.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-19T04:49:51Z)
• Macroscopic properties of buyer-seller networks in online marketplaces [55.41644538483948]
  We analyze two datasets containing 245M transactions that took place on online marketplaces between 2010 and 2021. We show that transactions in online marketplaces exhibit strikingly similar patterns despite significant differences in language, lifetimes, products, regulation, and technology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-16T18:00:47Z)
• The Matter of Chance: Auditing Web Search Results Related to the 2020 U.S. Presidential Primary Elections Across Six Search Engines [68.8204255655161]
  We look at the text search results for "us elections", "donald trump", "joe biden" and "bernie sanders" queries on Google, Baidu, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, and Yandex. Our findings indicate substantial differences in the search results between search engines and multiple discrepancies within the results generated for different agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-03T11:18:19Z)
• The Proper Use of Google Trends in Forecasting Models [0.0]
  Each sample of Google search data is different from the other, even if you set the same search term, data and location. This means that it is possible to find arbitrary conclusions merely by chance. This paper aims to show why and when it can become a problem and how to overcome this obstacle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-07T11:33:51Z)
• Search Engine Similarity Analysis: A Combined Content and Rankings Approach [6.69087470775851]
  We present an analysis of the affinity of the two major search engines, Google and Bing, along with DuckDuckGo. We developed a new similarity metric that leverages both the content and the ranking of search responses. We found that Google stands apart, but Bing and DuckDuckGo are largely indistinguishable from each other.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-01T23:57:24Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.