IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v22y2011i4p739-755.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Usercentric Operational Decision Making in Distributed Information Retrieval

Author

Listed:
  • Kartik Hosanagar

    (Operations and Information Management, The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103)

Abstract

Information specialists in enterprises regularly use distributed information retrieval (DIR) systems that query a large number of information retrieval (IR) systems, merge the retrieved results, and display them to users. There can be considerable heterogeneity in the quality of results returned by different IR servers. Further, because different servers handle collections of different sizes and have different processing and bandwidth capacities, there can be considerable heterogeneity in their response times. The broker in the DIR system has to decide which servers to query, how long to wait for responses, and which retrieved results to display based on the benefits and costs imposed on users. The benefit of querying more servers and waiting longer is the ability to retrieve more documents. The costs may be in the form of access fees charged by IR servers or user's cost associated with waiting for the servers to respond. We formulate the broker's decision problem as a stochastic mixed-integer program and present analytical solutions for the problem. Using data gathered from FedStats---a system that queries IR engines of several U.S. federal agencies---we demonstrate that the technique can significantly increase the utility from DIR systems. Finally, simulations suggest that the technique can be applied to solve the broker's decision problem under more complex decision environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Kartik Hosanagar, 2011. "Usercentric Operational Decision Making in Distributed Information Retrieval," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 739-755, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:22:y:2011:i:4:p:739-755
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1100.0287
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0287
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1100.0287?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter E. Rossi & Robert E. McCulloch & Greg M. Allenby, 1996. "The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 321-340.
    2. Debabrata Dey, 2003. "Record Matching in Data Warehouses: A Decision Model for Data Consolidation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 240-254, April.
    3. Dellaert, B.G.C. & Kahn, B., 1998. "How Tolerable is Delay? Consumers' Evaluations of Internet Web Sites After Waiting," Other publications TiSEM ca8d3a6b-4329-42ae-a595-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Stigler, George J., 2011. "Economics of Information," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 5, pages 35-49.
    5. Fred M. Feinberg & Joel Huber, 1996. "A Theory of Cutoff Formation Under Imperfect Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 65-84, January.
    6. Füsun Gönül & Kannan Srinivasan, 1993. "Modeling Multiple Sources of Heterogeneity in Multinomial Logit Models: Methodological and Managerial Issues," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 213-229.
    7. Dennis F. Galletta & Raymond M. Henry & Scott McCoy & Peter Polak, 2006. "When the Wait Isn’t So Bad: The Interacting Effects of Website Delay, Familiarity, and Breadth," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 20-37, March.
    8. Ramayya Krishnan & Xiaoping Li & David Steier & Leon Zhao, 2001. "On Heterogeneous Database Retrieval: A Cognitively Guided Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 286-301, September.
    9. Haim Mendelson & Seungjin Whang, 1990. "Optimal Incentive-Compatible Priority Pricing for the M/M/1 Queue," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 870-883, October.
    10. Debabrata Dey & Sumit Sarkar & Prabuddha De, 1998. "A Probabilistic Decision Model for Entity Matching in Heterogeneous Databases," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(10), pages 1379-1395, October.
    11. Eric J. Johnson & John W. Payne, 1985. "Effort and Accuracy in Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 395-414, April.
    12. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    13. Rudy K. Moenaert & William E. Souder, 1996. "Context and Antecedents of Information Utility at the R&D/Marketing Interface," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1592-1610, November.
    14. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    15. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    16. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    17. Thi Truong Avrahami & Lawrence Yau & Luo Si & Jamie Callan, 2006. "The FedLemur project: Federated search in the real world," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 347-358, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alan L. Montgomery & Kartik Hosanagar & Ramayya Krishnan & Karen B. Clay, 2004. "Designing a Better Shopbot," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 189-206, February.
    2. Hauser, John R., 2014. "Consideration-set heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1688-1699.
    3. Sonntag, Axel, 2015. "Search costs and adaptive consumers: Short time delays do not affect choice quality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 64-79.
    4. Shuk Ying Ho & David Bodoff & Kar Yan Tam, 2011. "Timing of Adaptive Web Personalization and Its Effects on Online Consumer Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 660-679, September.
    5. Song Lin & Juanjuan Zhang & John R. Hauser, 2015. "Learning from Experience, Simply," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann & Christian Kaiser, 2007. "The effect of product variety on purchase probability," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 111-131, August.
    7. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    8. Sören Köcher & Hartmut H. Holzmüller, 2014. "Zu viel des Guten? Eine Analyse der Wirkung von Verbraucherschutzinformation," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 306-343, June.
    9. Aloysius, John A. & Davis, Fred D. & Wilson, Darryl D. & Ross Taylor, A. & Kottemann, Jeffrey E., 2006. "User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: The impact of preference elicitation techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 273-285, February.
    10. S. Iglesias-Parro & A. Ortega & E. De la Fuente & I. Martín, 2001. "Context Variables as Cognitive Effort Modulators in Decision Making Using an Alternative-Based Processing Strategy," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 311-323, August.
    11. Alan L. Montgomery & Shibo Li & Kannan Srinivasan & John C. Liechty, 2004. "Modeling Online Browsing and Path Analysis Using Clickstream Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 579-595, November.
    12. Adam Sanjurjo, 2015. "Search, Memory, and Choice Error: An Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    13. Brynjolfsson, Erik & Dick, Astrid Andrea & Smith, Michael D., 2004. "Search and Product Differentiation at an Internet Shopbot," Working papers 4441-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    14. Marco Bertini & Luc Wathieu, 2008. "Research Note—Attention Arousal Through Price Partitioning," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 236-246, 03-04.
    15. Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2004. "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 391-406, October.
    16. Joffre Swait & Fred Feinberg, 2014. "Deciding how to decide: an agenda for multi-stage choice modelling research in marketing," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 26, pages 649-660, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Gerald Häubl & Valerie Trifts, 2000. "Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 4-21, May.
    18. Murthi, B.P.S. & Rao, Ram C., 2012. "Price Awareness and Consumers’ Use of Deals in Brand Choice," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 34-46.
    19. Joseph Pancras, 2010. "A Framework to Determine the Value of Consumer Consideration Set Information for Firm Pricing Strategies," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 269-300, March.
    20. Dimitrios Tsekouras & Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Bas Donkers & Gerald Häubl, 2020. "Product set granularity and consumer response to recommendations," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 186-202, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:22:y:2011:i:4:p:739-755. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.