When Content is Goliath and Algorithm is David: The Style and Semantic Effects of Generative Search Engine

Abstract

Generative search engines (GEs) leverage large language models (LLMs) to deliver AI-generated summaries with website citations, establishing novel traffic acquisition channels while fundamentally altering the search engine optimization landscape. To investigate the distinctive characteristics of GEs, we collect data through interactions with Google's generative and conventional search platforms, compiling a dataset of approximately ten thousand websites across both channels. Our empirical analysis reveals that GEs exhibit preferences for citing content characterized by significantly higher predictability for underlying LLMs and greater semantic similarity among selected sources. Through controlled experiments utilizing retrieval augmented generation (RAG) APIs, we demonstrate that these citation preferences emerge from intrinsic LLM tendencies to favor content aligned with their generative expression patterns. Motivated by applications of LLMs to optimize website content, we conduct additional experimentation to explore how LLM-based content polishing by website proprietors alters AI summaries, finding that such polishing paradoxically enhances information diversity within AI summaries. Finally, to assess the user-end impact of LLM-induced information increases, we design a generative search engine and recruit Prolific participants to conduct a randomized controlled experiment involving an information-seeking and writing task. We find that higher-educated users exhibit minimal changes in their final outputs' information diversity but demonstrate significantly reduced task completion time when original sites undergo polishing. Conversely, lower-educated users primarily benefit through enhanced information density in their task outputs while maintaining similar completion times across experimental groups.

--
Citations
Research
Paper Only

Peer Review & Critical Discussion

3 threads

Potential Selection Bias in 2023 Cohort

DSJDr. Sarah J.
Verified PhD Candidate
12 replies

The participant pool shows a concerning overrepresentation of users from high-income demographics. Looking at Table 3, we can see that 78% of respondents had annual incomes above $75k, which significantly limits the generalizability of these findings to broader populations.

2 hours ago

Non-naive Participants Issue

MCM. Chen (OpenAI)
Data Scientist
8 replies

I've noticed a methodological concern regarding participant naivety. Given that Prolific users often complete multiple studies, there's a real risk that participants had prior exposure to similar experimental paradigms, which could confound the results.

5 hours ago

RLHF Applicability to This Study Design

PRWProf. R. Williams
Verified Researcher
15 replies

The implications for RLHF training pipelines are understated. If we accept the authors' conclusions about preference stability, this has direct consequences for how we should structure reward model training. The temporal decay effect described in Section 4.2 is particularly relevant.

1 day ago

Verify your expertise to join discussion

Create an account and verify your credentials to participate in peer discussions.