All I did a test using Google, Google Scholar, and Bing. I specifically looked up some neuroscience terms (TIA, ischemia, hemorrhagic vascular accident, etc) and some terms that student are commonly misinformed about- (e.g., hypnosis, recovered memory, fundamental attribution error- and just attribution). The "relevant" decision links seemed to be at about the same levels of confusion on Google and Bing- maybe there was a difference but you'd have to be pretty through to find it. Google scholar did a far better job of finding scholarly or relevant links and pointed to far fewer "bizarre" connections. In other words, I tried to test the very claims that Microsoft is making in its recent ad campaigns and their Bing "decision engine" seemed to me to act just like other search engines- it seemed to be the way you phrase the question more than any benefit to their new product that mattered. Perhaps others will find different results but I'm not impressed- at least not yet. Tim _______________________________ Timothy O. Shearon, PhD Professor and Chair Department of Psychology The College of Idaho Caldwell, ID 83605 email: [email protected]
teaching: intro to neuropsychology; psychopharmacology; general; history and systems "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." Dorothy Parker -----Original Message----- From: michael sylvester [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tue 6/9/2009 8:46 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] Bing/Microsoft new search engine Check out Microsoft's new search engine BING www.bing.com Happy binging. Michael Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
<<winmail.dat>>
