Great search, defaults bad for blood pressure

  • Thread starter Andre
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the use of the search feature on the site. One user suggests using the search tool on the site, while another suggests using Google with the site's URL to get better results. However, both methods have limitations, such as not being able to search for specific words within a person's posts. The conversation also touches on the frustration with the search feature not being efficient and the suggestion to improve it.
  • #1
Andre
4,311
74
This site as a very nice search feature, I use it occasionally to retrieve older threads when relevant in the discussions. :approve:

So I make the selections required, user name, search term, select correct forum and hit search

The following errors occurred with your search:
1 Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

But bad speller or not, that word is spelled right, so what is wrong? Ah... searching titles only, :rolleyes: should be search entire posts, so select and click:

The following errors occurred with your search:
This forum requires that you wait 30 seconds between searches. Please try again in 15 seconds.

Okay, limiting server activities to keep the speed up, good thinking, :smile: ...tap...tap...click:

The following errors occurred with your search:
1 Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

:grumpy: Now what's wrong again? Ah, search options two weeks ago and newer. Well, I seldom use the advanced search option for two weeks and newer, those are usually easy to find. Anyway, changing newer into older and hit search:

The following errors occurred with your search:
This forum requires that you wait 30 seconds between searches. Please try again in 10 seconds.

:devil:

Okay I know, read the f page and give the correct instructions. But my avatar suggests the limits of my interlectual processing capacity and if I concentrate on answering, there are little or no grey cells left for such auxiliary cognitive activities.

Would be better for the blood pressure if the defaults were finding threads instead of titles and the time range default including a couple of months :smile:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You could use google to search the forum. In the google search box type "search term site:www.physicsforums.com". It seems to work better than the search tool on the forum.
 
  • #3
The search engine in this forum SUCKS!

Is that clear enough of an explanation?

Zz.
 
  • #4
ZapperZ said:
The search engine in this forum SUCKS!

Is that clear enough of an explanation?

Zz.

Bingo :approve:

I second what cristo said, use google and add site:physicsforums.com :smile:
 
  • #5
cristo said:
You could use google to search the forum. In the google search box type "search term site:www.physicsforums.com". It seems to work better than the search tool on the forum.

Hm, useful hint, thanks!
 
  • #6
radou said:
Hm, useful hint, thanks!

Yup-- I picked it up off ranger in a thread a while ago (dont want to take too much credit for the idea :smile: ) It's useful for searching sites without search engines too!
 
  • #7
ZapperZ said:
The search engine in this forum SUCKS!

Is that clear enough of an explanation?

Zz.

:rofl: Agreed!

Actually, the biggest problem I've run into is trying to search for a thread when the person who titled the thread couldn't spell, so my correctly spelled search query won't find the incorrectly spelled thread title. :rolleyes: Google seems to be better at figuring out misspelled words.
 
  • #8
Ah! I must wholehardtly agree with everything said!

If Greg fixed the search feature to be... decent I think we would all be much, much happier. Why not just put a little Google text entry bar and button there?
 
  • #9
Only problem is, with Google you can't look for postings by a specific person that contain specific words. I think you can get only entire threads, so at best you can get threads that the person has posted in, that contain those words (which may have been posted by someone else).

When I want to find something I've posted before, I use the site search for that reason, because I can usually remember some likely words to search for, and I usually manage to spell them correctly.
 

1. What is the "Great search, defaults bad for blood pressure" study about?

The study examines the effects of search engine defaults on users' blood pressure levels. It aims to determine if certain default settings on search engines, such as showing personalized search results or displaying advertisements, can cause increased stress and higher blood pressure in users.

2. What are the potential implications of this study's findings?

The findings suggest that search engine defaults can have a significant impact on users' stress levels and overall health. This could have implications for both individuals and society as a whole, as high levels of stress have been linked to various health problems.

3. How was the study conducted?

The study used a randomized controlled trial, where participants were randomly assigned to either a group with personalized search engine defaults or a control group with neutral defaults. Their blood pressure levels were then measured while performing various search tasks.

4. What were the results of the study?

The study found that participants in the personalized search engine defaults group had significantly higher blood pressure levels compared to those in the control group. This suggests that certain default settings on search engines can indeed have a negative impact on users' blood pressure.

5. What are the implications for search engine companies?

Search engine companies may need to consider the potential health effects of their default settings and make changes to reduce the stress and potential harm to users. They could also provide options for users to customize their own defaults based on their preferences and needs.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
892
  • Special and General Relativity
5
Replies
144
Views
6K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Feedback and Announcements
6
Replies
183
Views
76K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top