Researchers rely on academic Web search engines to find scientific sources, but search engine mechanisms may selectively present content that aligns with biases embedded in queries. This study examines whether confirmation biased queries prompted into Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar will yield results aligned with a query's bias. Six queries (topics across health and technology domains such as vaccines, Internet use) were analyzed for disparities in search results. We confirm that biased queries (targeting benefits or risks) affect search results in line with bias, with technology-related queries displaying more significant disparities. Overall, Semantic Scholar exhibited fewer disparities than Google Scholar. Topics rated as more polarizing did not consistently show more disparate results. Academic search results that perpetuate confirmation bias have strong implications for both researchers and citizens searching for evidence. More research is needed to explore how scientific inquiry and academic search engines interact.

翻译：研究人员依赖学术网络搜索引擎查找科学文献，但搜索引擎机制可能选择性地呈现与查询中嵌入的偏见相符的内容。本研究检验当向Google Scholar和Semantic Scholar输入具有确认偏见的查询时，搜索结果是否会与查询的偏见倾向保持一致。我们针对六个查询主题（涵盖健康与技术领域，如疫苗、互联网使用等）分析了搜索结果的差异。研究证实，带有倾向性（强调益处或风险）的查询会影响搜索结果，使其与偏见方向一致，其中技术相关查询呈现更显著的差异。总体而言，Semantic Scholar表现出的差异少于Google Scholar。被评定为更具争议性的话题并未持续呈现更显著的差异。延续确认偏见的学术搜索结果对寻求证据的研究人员和公众均具有重要影响。未来需要更多研究来探索科学探究与学术搜索引擎之间的相互作用机制。