There are many ways of searching for documents, papers, books, etc. on a given topic, but most of them require the information to be better organized and more standardized than documents on the web are. As a result, users like yourself are stuck with doing a lot of free-text searching, meaning, looking for documents that contain words you think will be in the document you are seeking.
Most search engines give you the option of entering a boolean search, that is, one that uses AND and OR and looks something like this: "White house" and (schedule or calendar) and (events or tours). It is really very difficult to have successful free-text searches without understanding how to build search strings like this. You really do not have enough power to narrow your search to a reasonable number of potentially useful documents without it.
AND means "I want only documents that contain both words."
OR means "I want documents that contain either word. I don't care which word."
So going back to the cat and dog diagram. If I want the yellow areas in each of the following diagrams I would use the search string shown next to it.
documents that talk about dogs |
boolean search: dogs |
documents that talk about cats |
boolean search: cats |
documents that talk about both cats and dogs |
boolean search: cats AND dogs |
documents that talk about either cats or dogs |
boolean search: cats OR dogs |
For Example: if I look for articles about using leashes with dogs or using leashes with cats with the search "cats OR dogs AND leashes" I may not retrieve the documents I intend. The computer does not read from left to right the way humans do. In fact it has a completely different way of looking at this search; most search engines interpret the ANDs first followed by the ORs. So what I would really get out of this search is documents that talk about dogs with leashes along with any document about cats! Why? The diagrams below will demonstrate:
| Our information space looks like this: | ![]() |
| If we interpret the search "cats OR dogs AND leashes" the way the computer does, we would first AND the circles for dogs and leashes, the yellow area. Then we would OR that resulting area with the circle for cats resulting in documents in both the yellow and orange areas. | ![]() |
To solve this problem we tell the computer that the OR is to be interpreted first. So instead we use the search string "(dogs OR cats) AND leashes". This string would result in the yellow information space below being retrieved.
Even when you think the computer is going to do what you want, it is always safer to use parenthesis if there is even a chance of confusion. The parenthesis will also help you read your own searches.
There are times when parenthesis are not needed:
So instead of the above search, I really want to use "red NEAR barns". This means I will get documents with sentences like "Barry headed down the path to the red barn" or "we took some red clothes out of the barn". The tolerance of NEAR varies by search engine with a range 9 to 15 words being typical. Note that sometimes this feature is called WITHIN, but the three below all use the syntax NEAR.
For Example: say while I was doing my leash research I kept getting a whole bunch of documents about people who went for walks with their dogs and their llamas. Say also that all of these authors were obsessed with their new llama leashes and never seemed to get around to talking about dog leashes. I may be tempted to change my search to ignore any document that contains the word "llama". But I may be eliminating the very documents I really want to get. What if the foremost expert on leashes always dedicates her papers to her pet llama, or her name is Mildred P. Llama. The NOT directive is completely non-discriminatory; it only takes one single instance of a word to eliminate a document from your retrieved set.
Say I am searching in the information space shown in this diagram:

Say I want documents about collies and cats growing up together, the yellow area shown here:

I may be tempted to use the search: dogs AND cats AND collies but the word "dogs" is redundant since all of the documents about collies are also about dogs. The search cats AND collies gets me the same yellow area.
A good general rule (for your first few search attempts at least) is to stick with a simple search and resort to a more complicated one only if you are not finding what you want.