Based on the queries that were run on both Google and EBSCOHost the following tables illustrate the key differences. The first table highlights the results returned based on the queries.
| Type of queries | No of queries
run |
EBSCOHost | |
| Power Search only | 3 | Returns a large number of results even after applying filters | Able to return a smaller number of results |
| Power Search with Stem | 3 | Returns a large number of results even after applying filters | Able to return a smaller number of results |
| Power Search with Phrasing | 3 | The choice of keywords used in the phrasing impacts the results returned | Not able to conclude anything no results found |
| Power Search with Phrasing and Stem | 3 | Returns a smaller number of results | Not able to conclude anything no results found |
The second table discusses the features available between Google and EBSCOHost and their effectiveness.
| Features | EBSCOHost | |
| Boolean operators | Helpful to refine the search | Very helpful to refine the search |
| Filters | Filters are helpful to narrow the results | Filters are helpful to narrow the results |
| Document types | Helpful to refine the search | Very useful to refine the search |
| Response time | Very fast on all queries | Very fast on all queries |
In conclusion, EBSCOHost is slightly better in its effectiveness because it returns a smaller pool of results when compared to Google. However, for the range of queries Google is more effective as it can produce results with a combination of stem and phrasing while EBSCOHost doesn’t work very well when the queries are complex.
Personal Privacy in the Digital Age 
