How Generative AI Disrupts Search: An Empirical Study of Google Search, Gemini, and AI Overviews
Riley Grossman, Songjiang Liu, Michael K. Chen, Mike Smith, Cristian Borcea, Yi Chen
Abstract
Generative AI is being increasingly integrated into web search for the convenience it provides users. In this work, we aim to understand how generative AI disrupts web search by retrieving and presenting the information and sources differently from traditional search engines. We introduce a public benchmark dataset of 11,500 user queries to support our study and future research of generative search. We compare the search results returned by Google's search engine, the accompanying AI Overview (AIO), and Gemini Flash 2.5 for each query. We have made several key findings. First, we find that for 51.5% of representative, real-user queries, AIOs are generated, and are displayed above the organic search results. Controversial questions frequently result in an AIO. Second, we show that the retrieved sources are substantially different for each search engine (<0.2 average Jaccard similarity). Traditional Google search is significantly more likely to retrieve information from popular or institutional websites in government or education, while generative search engines are significantly more likely to retrieve Google-owned content. Third, we observe that websites that block Google's AI crawler are significantly less likely to be retrieved by AIOs, despite having access to the content. Finally, AIOs are less consistent when processing two runs of the same query, and are less robust to minor query edits. Our findings have important implications for understanding how generative search impacts website visibility, the effectiveness of generative engine optimization techniques, and the information users receive. We call for revenue frameworks to foster a sustainable and mutually beneficial ecosystem for publishers and generative search providers.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on13
- Tranco: A Research-Oriented Top Sites Ranking Hardened Against ManipulationVictor Le Pochat, Tom van Goethem, Samaneh Tajalizadehkhoob, Maciej Korczynski et al.NDSS 2019 · 826 citations
- Generative Echo Chamber? Effect of LLM-Powered Search Systems on Diverse Information SeekingNikhil Sharma, Q. Vera Liao, Ziang XiaoCHI 2024 · 123 citations
- Answering Questions by Meta-Reasoning over Multiple Chains of ThoughtOri Yoran, Tomer Wolfson, Ben Bogin, Uri Katz et al.EMNLP 2023 · 30 citations
- Neural Retrievers are Biased Towards LLM-Generated ContentSunhao Dai, Yuqi Zhou, Liang Pang, Weihao Liu et al.KDD 2024 · 26 citations
- GEO: Generative Engine OptimizationPranjal Aggarwal, Vishvak Murahari, Tanmay Rajpurohit, Ashwin Kalyan et al.KDD 2024 · 23 citations
Related papers
- An Eye Tracking Study: Are AI Overviews Changing Search Behavior?Sara Allawati, Dana McKay, Mark Sanderson, Paul Thomas et al.SIGIR 2026 · 2 citations
- SAGEO Arena: A Realistic Environment for Evaluating Search-Augmented Generative Engine OptimizationSunghwan Kim, Wooseok Jeong, Serin Kim, Sangam Lee et al.KDD 2026 · 8 citations
- A Comparative Study of Users' Information-Seeking Practices Across Search Engines and Generative AI ChatbotsElsa Lichtenegger, Aleksandra Urman, Aniko HannakSIGIR 2026
- Generative Ghost: Investigating Ranking Bias Hidden in AI-Generated VideosHaowen Gao, Liang Pang, Shicheng Xu, Leigang Qu et al.ACM MM 2025 · 1 citation
- Big Help or Big Brother? Auditing Tracking, Profiling, and Personalization in Generative AI AssistantsYash Vekaria, Aurelio Loris Canino, Jonathan Levitsky, Alex Ciechonski et al.USENIX Security 2025
