Exploring and Comparing the Performance of Search Engines and Meta Search Engines in Retrieving Information in the Field of Information Sciences and Knowledge Studies

Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of knowledge and information science, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

2 Department of knowledge and information science, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.


Purpose: the purpose of this study was to explore and compare the performance of search engines and meta search engines in information retrieval of information science and knowledge science.
Methodology: the research is applied one and in semi-experimental design. The statistical population consisted of all search engines and meta search engines active on the web divided into two categories of exploratory engines and exploratory meta search based on randomized sampling. In these two categories, seven search engines were selected based on purposeful sampling and five metasearch engines were also selected from www.searchenginewatch.com.
Findings: among the seven search engine searches, Google search engine obtained the highest precision in retrieving relevant information, and among the five metasearch engines metagofer was identified as having the most precision. Moreover, the Google search engine and Yandex have the most overlap, and gigablast search engine showed the lowest overlap with the other search engines.
Conclusion: search engines and metasearch engines have the same function in retrieving information related to the field of information Science and Knowledge Studies. The hypothesis of the research regarding the better performance in information retrieval has been rejected due the achieved results.  However, in relation with overlap issues metasearch engines are of higher preference.




    1.     Agrawal, R., Golshan, B. & Papalexakis, E.  )2016(. Overlap in the Web Search Results of Google and Bing. The proceedings of the Web Science Track of the 2015 International World Wide Web Conference. The Journal of Web Science,2.

    1. Ali Bayek, M. Jamshidi Ork, Asghar Hineh Abad, L. (2011). Evaluation of traditional, relative overlap and degree of compound freedom in PubMed and Scopus databases on the subject of cardiovascular disease. Health Information Management,8 (3): 345-353. [in Persian]
    2. Aslanians, H., ghazi mir saeed, j. (2014). A Comparative Study of Selected Hypermotors Searching for Recovery of Cleft Palate and Lip Disease Information Between 2015 - 2013. Student Research Committee of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, 17 (59): 60-67. [in Persian]
    3. Clarke, S.J. (2000) .Search Engines for the World Wide Web. Journal of Internet Cataloging, 2(3-4): 81-.93
    4. Egghe, L., & Goovaerts, M. (2007). A note on measuring overlap. Journal of Information Science,33 (2): 189-195.
    5. Esfandiari Moghaddam, A (2005). Investigation of search results in search engines and their covered engines in terms of overlap and ranking. Master thesis. Mashhad: Ferdowsi University.[in Persian]
    6. Ghazi mir Saeed, J. Haqqani, H. Akbari, AS. (2007). Comparative study of public search engines and selected public search engines in retrieving physiotherapy information from the World Wide Web and determining their overlap. Health Information Management,4 (1): 11-21. [in Persian]
    7. Ghazi mir saeed, j., por amini, z. (2014). Respiratory system overlap in two scopus and web of science databases: A brief report. Journal of Faculty of Medicine( Tehran University of Medical Sciences),72 (12): 854-859. [in Persian]
    8. Hariri, N. Emami, G. Malik, M. (2015). The accuracy and comprehensiveness of general search engines in retrieving images of major endocrine diseases. Iranian Endocrinology and Metabolism, 17 (2): 104-97 . [in Persian]
    9. khosheian, n. (2015). Comparison of Retrieved Results from Web Searching Hypermotors in Information Science and Knowledge. Information Systems and Services, 4 (2): 63-80. [in Persian]
    10. kosha, K. (2002). Internet Exploration Tools: Principles, Skills, and Features of Web Search. Tehran: Librarian. [in Persian]
    11. minnie, D.& srinivasan, S .( 2011) Meta search engine with an intelligent Interface for information retrieval on Multiple domains. International Journal of Computer Science, Engineering and Information Technology (IJCSEIT), 1(4):37-45.
    12. Mohammad Ismail, s. Firoozi, s. (2009). Comparison of overlap of retrieval results in search engines and search engines in nanotechnology information retrieval. Information Seeking and Information, 23: 17-24. [in Persian]
    13. Mohammad Ismail, s., ghaemi, m (2009). Comparison of overlap of retrieved results in search engines and search engines in agricultural information retrieval. Information and Information Technology, 21: 55-61. [in Persian]
    14. Mohammad Ismail, s., Mansour Kiai, r (2009). Comparison of General Search Engines and Super Motors in Physical Science Information Retrieval and their Overlap. National Librarian Studies and Information Organization,22 (3):131-140. [in Persian]
    15. Rather, R. A., Lone, F. A. & Shah, G. J. (2008). Overlap in Web search results: A study of five search engines. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), 226.
    16. Salman Mohajer, F. (2016). Reviewing the Overlap of Results among Google, Yahoo, and Bing Search Engines. International Academic Journal of  Science and Engineering, 3 (1): 60- 66.
    17. Shafi, S. M.,& Rather, R. A. (2005). Precision and recall of five search engines for retrieval of scholarly Information in the fild of Biotechnology. Webology, 2(2): 42-47.
    18. Spink, Amanda; et al. (2006). Overlap among major web search engines. Internet Research, 16(9): 419-426.
    19. Weiyi, M., Clement, Y& King, l. (2002). Building Efficient and Effective Metasearch Engines (2002). ACM Computing Surveys, 34(1):48–89.

    4.    Bharat, K&. Broder, A. (1998). A Technique for Measuring the Relative Size and Systems overlap of public Web search engines. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1-7): 379-388.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00127-5