Contents4
Sufficient consensus
Information foraging describes search as a cost-benefit process modelled on foraging behaviour. Information scent, patch models and diet models predict when a person continues and when they leave.
It is one of the most predictive theories in the field.
What the result pages leave out
These belong to the subject. People ask about them. They are missing from the agreed coverage.
- Scent in the search listing. The title and description are the first scent. Vague wording costs the visit before the page is ever loaded.
- The cost of a wrong click. People navigate defensively. A listing that might waste their time loses to one that clearly will not.
- Patch depletion. When every result says the same thing, the reader concludes the subject is exhausted and stops.
- Enrichment. Making your own patch obviously richer, with something not available elsewhere, is the only stable defence against leaving.
- Foraging as an explanation for bounce. A short visit is often a rational decision, not a design failure.
What people actually want to know
- Does my listing promise something specific enough to be worth a click?
- In the first screen, what tells the reader this page has something the others do not?
- Where does my page smell like every other result?
- What would make someone stay who is already tired of this subject?
Stand out to surprise customers. A reader who finds one thing they have not read before stops foraging and starts reading.