Information foraging is a theory that applies the ideas from optimal foraging theory to understand how human users search for information. The theory is based on the assumption that, when searching for information, humans use "built-in" foraging mechanisms that evolved to help our animal ancestors find food. Importantly, a better understanding of human search behavior can improve the usability of websites or any other user interface.
🌿 Foraging in High-Dimensional Data
My talk from the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute 2025 on how we can draw from thinking in complex systems science and game design to heal our relationship to the Web.
Misreading as Foraging: How Systems Get Used for Things They Weren't Made For - Astral's Blog
AI search answers are the fast food of your information diet – convenient and tasty, but no substitute for good nutrition
An information scientist explains that while Google’s AI Overviews and other AI search tools may look enticing, you shouldn’t rely on them to fill all your search needs.
AI search answers are the fast food of your information diet – convenient and tasty, but no substitute for good nutrition
An information scientist explains that while Google’s AI Overviews and other AI search tools may look enticing, you shouldn’t rely on them to fill all your search needs.
Search has its own bitter lesson
Human incentives to make content findable to your search matter more than technology
The Law of Conservation of Information: Search Processes Only Redistribute Existing Information
Conservation of information sparked scientific interest once a recurring pattern was noticed in the evolutionary computing literature. In grappling with the creation of information through evolutionary algorithms, this literature consistently revealed that the information outputted by such algorithms always needed first to be programmed into them. Thus, the primary goal of this literature—to uncover how information could be created from scratch or de novo —was shown to be misconceived: the information was not created but instead shuffled around or smuggled in, implying that it already existed in some form or other. Information output in these situations therefore always presupposed a counterbalancing input of prior information. Once this pattern was seen, the next logical step was to quantify the amount of information inputted and outputted, demonstrating a consistent mathematical relation between the two. This led to the proof of a number of theorems about search. In these theorems, a baseline search with probability p of success gave way to an improved search with probability q of success. Typically p would be very small and close to zero, implying a practically impossible search (like searching for a needle in a haystack). By contrast, q would be much larger and close to one, implying an eminently doable search. The punchline of these theorems was that, as the improved search became itself the subject of a search (a search for a search , or S4S), the probability of finding it could not exceed p / q , rendering success of the improved search no more probable than success of the original baseline search, in effect filling one hole by digging another. Such conservation-of-information theorems, as they came to be called, were search-space specific, adapted to different kinds of search across a range of search spaces. There was a measure-theoretic theorem in which probability measures guided search. There were also function-theoretic and fitness-theoretic theorems where mappings into the search space as well as fitness functions on the search space respectively guided search. The key insight of this paper is that all these conservation-of-information theorems are special cases of a simple probabilistic relation based on elementary probability theory. This paper identifies the underlying rationale that makes all the previous conservation-of-information theorems work. In so doing, it provides a straightforward proof and general formulation of what may rightly be called the Law of Conservation of Information.
Remembering the pre-Google web, when search was an experiment
Most people have completely forgotten how chaotic it really was."
Food, foragers, and folklore: the role of narrative in human subsistence
Narrative is a species-typical, reliably developing, complex cognitive process whose design is unlikely to have emerged by chance. Moreover, the folklore record indicates that narrative content is consistent across widely divergent cultures. I have argued elsewhere that a storyteller may use narrative to manipulate an audience's representations of the social and/or physical environment to serve his or her own fitness ends. However, my subsequent research suggests that such manipulation results from a broader selection pressure which narrative effectively alleviates: information acquisition. By substituting verbal representations for potentially costly first-hand experience, narrative enables an individual to safely and efficiently acquire information pertinent to the pursuit of fitness in local habitats. If this hypothesis is true, narrative should be rich with information useful to the pursuit of fitness. One class of information integral to the accomplishment of this task is foraging knowledge. In this paper, then, I present evidence that foraging peoples use narrative to transmit subsistence information: specifically, I demonstrate how various narrative devices (e.g., setting, description, mimicry, anthropomorphism) are used to communicate foraging knowledge.
Google Search Is Dying. What Comes Next Is Worse | The Walrus
As AI eats the web, the internet’s collective memory is disappearing
Litter Layer
Indie search engine for discovering personal and small-web sites — built largely by visitors like you.
Google Search's guidance about AI-generated content | Google Search Central Blog | Google for Developers
In this post, we'll share more about how AI-generated content fits into our long-standing approach to show helpful content to people on Search.
Learning with AI falls short compared to old-fashioned web search
Doing the mental work of connecting the dots across multiple web queries appears to help people understand the material better compared to an AI summary.
Learning with AI falls short compared to old-fashioned web search
Doing the mental work of connecting the dots across multiple web queries appears to help people understand the material better compared to an AI summary.
Learning by Chatting? Investigating the Impact of Generative AI on Information Seeking and Learning
Generative AI (GenAI) tools offer increasing opportunities for augmenting human cognitive tasks. Among these tasks, information seeking is being rapidly reshaped by GenAI tools, with potentially profound implications for learning and knowledge acquisition. To investigate these implications, we conducted a between-subjects field experiment in which participants pursued informal learning by seeking information through either ChatGPT or Google Search over a span of 8 days. Using a daily diary protocol, we gathered in-situ data on their information-seeking processes. Our findings show that participants in the ChatGPT group experienced diminished agency in their information-seeking processes, as they offloaded much of the information selection to AI, and consequently experienced greater meta-cognitive load arising from this reduced sense of control. We further highlight two sources of distortion in information access when using ChatGPT: biases in ChatGPT outputs, particularly towards providing solution-oriented artifacts over principled knowledge; and systematic shifts in users' information-seeking behaviors, whereby the conversational and socially-oriented interaction paradigm of current GenAI tools may inadvertently reduce exploration of the broader knowledge space. As a result, on average, participants in the ChatGPT group had worse learning outcomes than those using Google, especially for higher-order critical learning. Our work suggests inherent tensions between offloading information seeking to AI and meaningful learning, and provides broader implications for understanding AI's risks to human cognition.
Learning by Chatting? Investigating the Impact of Generative AI on Information Seeking and Learning
Generative AI (GenAI) tools offer increasing opportunities for augmenting human cognitive tasks. Among these tasks, information seeking is being rapidly reshaped by GenAI tools, with potentially profound implications for learning and knowledge acquisition. To investigate these implications, we conducted a between-subjects field experiment in which participants pursued informal learning by seeking information through either ChatGPT or Google Search over a span of 8 days. Using a daily diary protocol, we gathered in-situ data on their information-seeking processes. Our findings show that participants in the ChatGPT group experienced diminished agency in their information-seeking processes, as they offloaded much of the information selection to AI, and consequently experienced greater meta-cognitive load arising from this reduced sense of control. We further highlight two sources of distortion in information access when using ChatGPT: biases in ChatGPT outputs, particularly towards providing solution-oriented artifacts over principled knowledge; and systematic shifts in users' information-seeking behaviors, whereby the conversational and socially-oriented interaction paradigm of current GenAI tools may inadvertently reduce exploration of the broader knowledge space. As a result, on average, participants in the ChatGPT group had worse learning outcomes than those using Google, especially for higher-order critical learning. Our work suggests inherent tensions between offloading information seeking to AI and meaningful learning, and provides broader implications for understanding AI's risks to human cognition.
Experimental evidence of the effects of large language models versus web search on depth of learning
Abstract The effects of using large language models (LLMs) versus traditional web search on depth of learning are explored. A theory is proposed that when individuals learn about a topic from LLM syntheses, they risk developing shallower knowledge than when they learn through standard web search, even when the core facts in the results are the same. This shallower knowledge accrues from an inherent feature of LLMs—the presentation of results as summaries of vast arrays of information rather than individual search links—which inhibits users from actively discovering and synthesizing information sources themselves, as in traditional web search. Thus, when subsequently forming advice on the topic based on their search, those who learn from LLM syntheses (vs. traditional web links) feel less invested in forming their advice, and, more importantly, create advice that is sparser, less original, and ultimately less likely to be adopted by recipients. Results from seven online and laboratory experiments (n = 10,462) lend support for these predictions, and confirm, for example, that participants reported developing shallower knowledge from LLM summaries even when the results were augmented by real-time web links. Implications of the findings for recent research on the benefits and risks of LLMs, as well as limitations of the work, are discussed.
