skip to main content
10.1145/3173574.3173825acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Bento Browser: Complex Mobile Search Without Tabs

Published:21 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

People engaged in complex searches such as planning a vacation or understanding their medical symptoms are often overwhelmed by opening and managing many tabs. These challenges are exacerbated as search moves to smartphones and mobile devices where screen real-estate is limited and tasks are frequently suspended, resumed, and interleaved. Rather than continue to utilize tab-based browsing for complex search, we introduce a new way of browsing through a scaffolded interface. The list of search results serves as a mutable workspace, where a user can track progress on a specific information query. The search query serves as a gateway into this workspace, accessed through a task-subtask hierarchy. We instantiate this in the Bento mobile search system and investigate its effectiveness in three studies. We find converging evidence that users were able to make progress on their complex searching tasks with this structure, and find it more organized and easier to revisit.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

pn2556-file3.mp4

mp4

10.9 MB

References

  1. Altmann, E. M., and Trafton, J. G. Memory for goals: An activation-based model. Cognitive science 26, 1 (2002), 39--83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, C. R., and Horvitz, E. Web montage: A dynamic personalized start page. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM (2002), 704--712. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Anderson, J. Forrester Market Report: Consumer Behavior Online: A 2009 Deep Dive. http://www.forrester.com/go?docid=54327, 2009. Accessed: 2017-09--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, J. R., and Milson, R. Human memory: An adaptive perspective. Psychological Review 96, 4 (1989), 703.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Berant, J., Chou, A., Frostig, R., and Liang, P. Semantic parsing on freebase from question-answer pairs. In EMNLP, vol. 2 (2013), 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Blanco, R., Cambazoglu, B. B., Mika, P., and Torzec, N. Entity recommendations in web search. In International Semantic Web Conference, Springer (2013), 33--48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bota, H., Zhou, K., and Jose, J. M. Playing your cards right: The effect of entity cards on search behaviour and workload. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval, CHIIR '16, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2016), 131--140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Bota, H., Zhou, K., Jose, J. M., and Lalmas, M. Composite retrieval of heterogeneous web search. In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on World wide web, ACM (2014), 119--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Chang, J. C., Hahn, N., and Kittur, A. Supporting mobile sensemaking through intentionally uncertain highlighting. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, UIST '16, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2016), 61--68. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Chang, J. C., Kittur, A., and Hahn, N. Alloy: Clustering with crowds and computation. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2016), 3180--3191. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Cutting, D. R., Karger, D. R., Pedersen, J. O., and Tukey, J. W. Scatter/gather: A cluster-based approach to browsing large document collections. In Proceedings of the 15th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, ACM (1992), 318--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Daft, R. L., and Weick, K. E. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of management review 9, 2 (1984), 284--295.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Dervin, B. An overview of sense-making research: Concepts, methods, and results to date. The Author, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Dischler, J. Building for the next moment. http://adwords.blogspot.com/2015/05/ building-for-next-moment.html, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Dubroy, P., and Balakrishnan, R. A study of tabbed browsing among mozilla firefox users. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2010), 673--682. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Fisher, K., Counts, S., and Kittur, A. Distributed sensemaking: improving sensemaking by leveraging the efforts of previous users. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2012), 247--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Gioia, D. A., and Chittipeddi, K. Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic management journal 12, 6 (1991), 433--448.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Hahn, N., Chang, J., Kim, J. E., and Kittur, A. The knowledge accelerator: Big picture thinking in small pieces. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2016), 2258--2270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Hearst, M. A., and Degler, D. Sewing the seams of sensemaking: A practical interface for tagging and organizing saved search results. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction and Information Retrieval, ACM (2013), 4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Henderson Jr, D. A., and Card, S. Rooms: the use of multiple virtual workspaces to reduce space contention in a window-based graphical user interface. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 5, 3 (1986), 211--243. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Huang, J., and White, R. W. Parallel browsing behavior on the web. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia, ACM (2010), 13--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Kaptelinin, V., and Czerwinski, M. Beyond the desktop metaphor: designing integrated digital work environments, vol. 1. The MIT Press, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Kellar, M., Watters, C., and Shepherd, M. A field study characterizing web-based information-seeking tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 58, 7 (2007), 999--1018. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Kittur, A., Peters, A. M., Diriye, A., Telang, T., and Bove, M. R. Costs and benefits of structured information foraging. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2013), 2989--2998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Klein, G., Moon, B., and Hoffman, R. R. Making sense of sensemaking 1: Alternative perspectives. IEEE intelligent systems, 4 (2006), 70--73. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Kules, B., and Capra, R. Creating exploratory tasks for a faceted search interface. In Second Workshop on Human-Computer Interaction (HCIR 2008) (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Lasecki, W. S., Wesley, R., Nichols, J., Kulkarni, A., Allen, J. F., and Bigham, J. P. Chorus: A crowd-powered conversational assistant. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, UIST '13, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2013), 151--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Lella, A. Number of mobile-only internet users now exceeds desktop-only in the u.s. https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Blog/Number-ofMobile-Only-Internet-Users-Now-Exceeds-DesktopOnly-in-the-U.S, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Marchionini, G. Exploratory search: from finding to understanding. Communications of the ACM 49, 4 (2006), 41--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Marshall, C. C., and Shipman III, F. M. Spatial hypertext and the practice of information triage. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM conference on Hypertext, ACM (1997), 124--133. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Milliken, F. J. Perceiving and interpreting environmental change: An examination of college administrators' interpretation of changing demographics. Academy of management Journal 33, 1 (1990), 42--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Moraveji, N., Russell, D., Bien, J., and Mease, D. Measuring improvement in user search performance resulting from optimal search tips. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in Information Retrieval, ACM (2011), 355--364. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Morris, D., Ringel Morris, M., and Venolia, G. Searchbar: a search-centric web history for task resumption and information re-finding. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2008), 1207--1216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Morris, M. R., and Horvitz, E. Searchtogether: an interface for collaborative web search. In Proceedings of the 20th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, ACM (2007), 3--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Oulasvirta, A., and Saariluoma, P. Surviving task interruptions: Investigating the implications of long-term working memory theory. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64, 10 (2006), 941--961. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Pirolli, P., and Card, S. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. In Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis, vol. 5 (2005), 2--4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Quarteroni, S., and Manandhar, S. Designing an interactive open-domain question answering system. Natural Language Engineering 15, 01 (2009), 73--95. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Rose, D. E., and Levinson, D. Understanding user goals in web search. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM (2004), 13--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Russell, D. M., Stefik, M. J., Pirolli, P., and Card, S. K. The cost structure of sensemaking. In Proceedings of the INTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM (1993), 269--276. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Shipman III, F. M., Hsieh, H., Maloor, P., and Moore, J. M. The visual knowledge builder: a second generation spatial hypertext. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, ACM (2001), 113--122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Teevan, J., Karlson, A., Amini, S., Brush, A. J. B., and Krumm, J. Understanding the importance of location, time, and people in mobile local search behavior. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, MobileHCI '11, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2011), 77--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Teevan, J., Liebling, D. J., and Lasecki, W. S. Selfsourcing personal tasks. In CHI'14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2014), 2527--2532. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Voida, S., Mynatt, E. D., and Edwards, W. K. Re-framing the desktop interface around the activities of knowledge work. In Proceedings of the 21st annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, ACM (2008), 211--220. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Wang, Q., and Chang, H. Multitasking bar: prototype and evaluation of introducing the task concept into a browser. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2010), 103--112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. White, R. W., Kules, B., Drucker, S. M., et al. Supporting exploratory search, introduction, special issue, communications of the acm. Communications of the ACM 49, 4 (2006), 36--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. White, R. W., and Roth, R. A. Exploratory search: Beyond the query-response paradigm. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services 1, 1 (2009), 1--98. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Williams, K., Kiseleva, J., Crook, A. C., Zitouni, I., Awadallah, A. H., and Khabsa, M. Detecting good abandonment in mobile search. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW '16, International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee (Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland, 2016), 495--505. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Bento Browser: Complex Mobile Search Without Tabs

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      8489 pages
      ISBN:9781450356206
      DOI:10.1145/3173574

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 21 April 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate666of2,590submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader