The WWW is characterized by an unprecedented amount of information and a high heterogeneity of information quality. For a successful information search, for example, about a conflicting science-related or medical issue, thus, it is often important to evaluate the information sources regarding their trustworthiness and to compare and weigh (potentially conflicting) information from multiple sources. In this project we investigate through eyetracking analyses and log file data, verbal protocols, as well as argumentative summaries how Web users evaluate and process information during Web search about conflicting topics. Specifically, the project aims at examining how certain user characteristics and certain text characteristics influence source evaluations during Web search.

With regard to user characteristics, the focus is on Web users' domain-specific prior knowledge and epistemic beliefs. We not only aim to show that Web users with high prior knowledge and/or appropriate epistemic beliefs evaluate and compare Web information more critically and in a more elaborate way than searchers with less favorable prerequisites, but also to examine the underlying mechanisms of the evaluation- and comparison processes. With regard to text characteristics, therefore we aim at analyzing , on the process level how certain source cues on search engine results pages and Web pages as well as content-based discrepancies between Web pages trigger evaluation processes depending on the individual prerequisites of the users.