IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jcopol/v40y2017i3d10.1007_s10603-017-9349-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Profiling the Australian Google Consumer: Implications of Search Engine Practices for Consumer Law and Policy

Author

Listed:
  • A. Daly

    (Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Law)

  • A. Scardamaglia

    (Swinburne University of Technology Law School)

Abstract

Against the legal backdrop of proceedings against Google in various jurisdictions regarding the layout of its search result page, this article presents the results of a survey of a representative sample of 1014 Australian consumers, investigating their use of the Internet and specifically Google’s search engine, and the implications of these findings for consumer law and policy concerning the operation of search engines. The study is the first of its kind in Australia, despite litigation against Google in this jurisdiction for alleged misleading and deceptive conduct. The survey findings indicate that consumers have a lack of understanding about the operation and origin of the different elements of the Google search engine. In particular, the findings show particular confusion in relation to the operation and origin of Google’s related vertical services. Such confusion seems to be more pronounced among older respondents and those without higher education qualifications, although the survey revealed some more surprising and unexpected results in terms of the demographics of confusion. These findings are important for several reasons. Firstly, they identify and point to a gap in consumer knowledge about Google search that should be addressed, presenting an opportunity for consumer education in this area. Secondly, this research challenges the widely held assumption that the average (Australian) Internet user has a basic understanding about the operation and function of the Google search engine. Thirdly, the results leave open the possibility for further proceedings against Google in Australia on the basis of consumer law, the decision in Google v ACCC notwithstanding. This points to the potential for a more active role for consumer law in the digital ecosystem to address problems emanating from large and powerful platform providers such as Google than it previously has occupied.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Daly & A. Scardamaglia, 2017. "Profiling the Australian Google Consumer: Implications of Search Engine Practices for Consumer Law and Policy," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 299-320, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:40:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-017-9349-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10603-017-9349-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-017-9349-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10603-017-9349-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David S. Evans, 2009. "The Online Advertising Industry: Economics, Evolution, and Privacy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 37-60, Summer.
    2. Rossella Incardona & Cristina Poncibò, 2007. "The average consumer, the unfair commercial practices directive, and the cognitive revolution," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 21-38, March.
    3. Stefan Bechtold & Catherine Tucker, 2014. "Trademarks, Triggers, and Online Search," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 718-750, December.
    4. N. Helberger & M. Loos & Lucie Guibault & Chantal Mak & Lodewijk Pessers, 2013. "Digital Content Contracts for Consumers," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 37-57, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. H. Li & A. Nill, 2020. "Online Behavioral Targeting: Are Knowledgeable Consumers Willing to Sell Their Privacy?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 723-745, December.

    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. Marijn Sax & Natali Helberger & Nadine Bol, 2018. "Health as a Means Towards Profitable Ends: mHealth Apps, User Autonomy, and Unfair Commercial Practices," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 103-134, June.
    2. Peres, Renana & Muller, Eitan & Mahajan, Vijay, 2010. "Innovation diffusion and new product growth models: A critical review and research directions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 91-106.
    3. Liu Xingyi, 2016. "Fear of Discrimination: Net Neutrality and Product Differentiation on the Internet," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 211-247, December.
    4. Bayer, Emanuel & Srinivasan, Shuba & Riedl, Edward J. & Skiera, Bernd, 2020. "The impact of online display advertising and paid search advertising relative to offline advertising on firm performance and firm value," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 789-804.
    5. Wei Zhou & Zidong Wang, 2020. "Competing for Search Traffic in Query Markets: Entry Strategy, Platform Design, and Entrepreneurship," Working Papers 20-12, NET Institute.
    6. Jan Trzaskowski, 2011. "Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 377-392, September.
    7. Avi Goldfarb, 2014. "What is Different About Online Advertising?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(2), pages 115-129, March.
    8. Rajeev Goel, 2011. "Persistence of cigarette advertising across media and smoking rates," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(7), pages 611-619.
    9. Michael Faure & Hanneke Luth, 2011. "Behavioural Economics in Unfair Contract Terms," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 337-358, September.
    10. Nadine Lindstädt & Oliver Budzinski, 2011. "Newspaper vs. Online Advertising – Is There a Niche for Newspapers in Modern Advertising Markets?," Working Papers 113/11, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    11. Amedeo Piolatto, 2015. "Online booking and information: competition and welfare consequences of review aggregators," Working Papers 2015/11, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    12. Susan Athey & Emilio Calvano & Joshua S. Gans, 2018. "The Impact of Consumer Multi-homing on Advertising Markets and Media Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1574-1590, April.
    13. Hartmut Egger & Josef Falkinger, 2016. "Limited Consumer Attention in International Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1096-1128, November.
    14. Kerstin Gidlöf & Annika Wallin & Kenneth Holmqvist & Peter Møgelvang-Hansen, 2013. "Material Distortion of Economic Behaviour and Everyday Decision Quality," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 389-402, December.
    15. Nishant Chadha & Viswanath Pingali & Daniel Sokol, 2023. "Small Businesses and Digital Platforms," IIMA Working Papers WP 2023-09-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    16. Tucker, Catherine E., 2012. "The economics of advertising and privacy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 326-329.
    17. K. P. Purnhagen & E. Herpen & S. Kamps & F. Michetti, 2021. "Oversized Area Indications on Bonus Packs Fail to Affect Consumers’ Transactional Decisions—More Experimental Evidence on the Mars Case," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 385-406, September.
    18. Zhen Sun & Milind Dawande & Ganesh Janakiraman & Vijay Mookerjee, 2017. "Not Just a Fad: Optimal Sequencing in Mobile In-App Advertising," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 511-528, September.
    19. Henk Kox & Bas Straathof & Gijsbert Zwart, 2017. "Targeted advertising, platform competition, and privacy," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 557-570, September.
    20. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine Tucker, 2012. "Privacy and Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 12, pages 65-89, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:kap:jcopol:v:40:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-017-9349-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.