The Positive and Negative Influence of Search Results on People's Decisions about the Efficacy of Medical Treatments

Abstract

People regularly use web search engines to investigate the efficacy of medical treatments. Search results can contain documents that present incorrect information that contradicts current established medical understanding on whether a treatment is helpful or not for a health issue. If people are influenced by the incorrect information found in search results, they can make harmful decisions about the appropriate treatment. To determine the extent to which people can be influenced by search engine results, we conducted a controlled laboratory study that biased search results towards correct or incorrect information for 10 different medical treatments. We found that search engine results can significantly influence people both positively and negatively. Importantly, study participants made more incorrect decisions when they interacted with search results biased towards incorrect information than when they had no interaction with search results at all. For search domains such as health information, search engine designers and researchers must recognize that not all non-relevant information is the same. Some non-relevant information is incorrect and potentially harmful when people use it to make decisions that may negatively impact their lives.

Dr. Google, what can you tell me about homeopathy? Comparative study of the top10 websites in the United States, United Kingdom, France, Mexico and Spain

“…In the case of searches on health, the biases that can occur are determinant for users, as one of the problems detected when consulting Dr. Google is that the more you look for the less you trust the doctor (Van-Riel et al, 2017). Regarding the effects of search results users find, we must bear in mind that these have a great influence on decision making (Pogacar et al, 2017) and that the dominant response can be decisive (White, 2014).…”

“…The specific weight of search results is avoided when the user has prior scientific knowledge of the treatment on which information is sought on the Internet (Pogacar et al, 2017). Likewise, it also depends on the level of conviction of this prior knowledge and the reliability that the source that is being consulted suggests to the user (Kammerer et al, 2013).…”

“…Users tend to focus on the first results of the ranking (Gonzalo-Penela, 2015;Lee, 2005), so, logically, this ranking of search results is key to solving the user's demands. This order is not usually questioned by users (Lewandowski, 2017), who trust the relevance of the results (Noble, 2018), so that the selection of webs that appear first can have an important influence on them (Pogacar et al, 2017;Arif et al, 2018;Allam;Schulz;Nakamoto, 2014;Pan et al, 2007).…”

“…When searching a controversial health issue, whether at the scientific or social level, the type of content and the position on the topic of the best positioned websites have a determining potential to form the user's opinion (Pogacar et al, 2017;Germano;Sobbrio, 2017). The variety of points of view in the ranking seems to be related to the popularity of the topic in the public opinion (Gerhart, 2004).…”

Reliability Prediction for Health-Related Content: A Replicability Study

“…The results offered can be unreliable [2], inaccurate [9], or of poor quality [34]. This can have a greater or lesser impact depending on the context [37], but is especially sensitive when it comes to health-related content, as Pogacar et al [31] showed in a recent study.…”