Comments on: Is Analyzing Time on Site a Waste of Time? http://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/ #1 Subscribed Ecommerce Blog Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:57:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: qu’est ce que l’experience client? « ogeekvyhttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-37476 qu’est ce que l’experience client? « ogeekvy Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:46:40 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-37476 [...] comme le souligne bien un article de Linda Bustos sur Get Elastic [lien an anglais], que le temps passé sur un site soit court, moyen ou long n’a aucun sens en [...] [...] comme le souligne bien un article de Linda Bustos sur Get Elastic [lien an anglais], que le temps passé sur un site soit court, moyen ou long n’a aucun sens en [...]

]]> By: Linda Bustoshttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-24890 Linda Bustos Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:07:40 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-24890 What do your analytics say? I wouldn't go off of Alexa data. They collect their stats through their toolbar and it's a certain type of visitor that would install their toolbar. For example, if your forum is about internet marketing, that might explain the higher time on site stats from Alexa users. What do your analytics say? I wouldn’t go off of Alexa data. They collect their stats through their toolbar and it’s a certain type of visitor that would install their toolbar. For example, if your forum is about internet marketing, that might explain the higher time on site stats from Alexa users.

]]> By: FrederickGarciahttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-24741 FrederickGarcia Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:38:37 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-24741 Hi I was researching on the subject of time on site, and I ended up here. I find my time on site to be extremely high. According to Alexa it is over 40 minutes. I see ESPN for example is 6 minutes. I have a good community that debates alot on my site and I am sure I got a good core that boost up these stats, but I just can't see it being that high. http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fmmanouvelles.com# I do not really have a question other then do you think 40 minutes is imposible? Thank you Hi I was researching on the subject of time on site, and I ended up here.

I find my time on site to be extremely high. According to Alexa it is over 40 minutes. I see ESPN for example is 6 minutes.

I have a good community that debates alot on my site and I am sure I got a good core that boost up these stats, but I just can’t see it being that high.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fmmanouvelles.com#

I do not really have a question other then do you think 40 minutes is imposible?

Thank you

]]> By: Tom Millerhttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19179 Tom Miller Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:32:12 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19179 I agree that the way that Time on Site and Bounces are recorded is somewhat flawed by design. It is the nature of the mechanisms that collect clickstream data that define these metrics. Almost two years ago (!), I started to think about a new framework to link Time on Site and Bounces, since they are so closely related. This framework also develops a new way of calculating Time Spent on Site, using the same technique that demographers use to measure Average Life Expectancy. I wrote an introductory article here, check it out: http://www.tomsanalytics.com/2007/09/a-new-approach-to-the-time-spent-on-site-metric/ I agree that the way that Time on Site and Bounces are recorded is somewhat flawed by design. It is the nature of the mechanisms that collect clickstream data that define these metrics.

Almost two years ago (!), I started to think about a new framework to link Time on Site and Bounces, since they are so closely related. This framework also develops a new way of calculating Time Spent on Site, using the same technique that demographers use to measure Average Life Expectancy. I wrote an introductory article here, check it out:
http://www.tomsanalytics.com/2007/09/a-new-approach-to-the-time-spent-on-site-metric/

]]> By: Michael Torkildsenhttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19177 Michael Torkildsen Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:57:53 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19177 Yes, it is a valuable metric, but not the only metric. Yes, it is a valuable metric, but not the only metric.

]]> By: John Hyde : Site Doublershttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19175 John Hyde : Site Doublers Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:51:57 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19175 Here is a fresh way to look at Time-on-Site by asking 2 questions: 1) If you wanted to change time on site would you want to increase it or decrease it ? 2) How would you do that (increase or decrease) ? Here is a fresh way to look at Time-on-Site by asking 2 questions:

1) If you wanted to change time on site would you want to increase it or decrease it ?

2) How would you do that (increase or decrease) ?

]]> By: Brian Katz - Analytics - VKIhttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19173 Brian Katz - Analytics - VKI Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:05:48 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19173 @Adam and all You are on the money talking of segmenting - no one metric, average or absolute, can have relevance out of context nor be meaningful outside of meaningful context. To take context further, segmenting can also be done by metric (eg page views, conversion rate, etc) in addition to by dimension (campaign, keyword, landing page - by data values) Think of visits of 2 minutes with 2 pv's vs. those with 5 pv's. @Jeff Its not the metric that is a failure - very few metrics are (something like "hits" may be). Taking anything out of context is en route to failure. Brian Katz - Analytics - VKI @Adam and all

You are on the money talking of segmenting – no one metric, average or absolute, can have relevance out of context nor be meaningful outside of meaningful context.

To take context further, segmenting can also be done by metric (eg page views, conversion rate, etc) in addition to by dimension (campaign, keyword, landing page – by data values)

Think of visits of 2 minutes with 2 pv’s vs. those with 5 pv’s.

@Jeff
Its not the metric that is a failure – very few metrics are (something like “hits” may be).
Taking anything out of context is en route to failure.

Brian Katz – Analytics – VKI

]]> By: Jonny Longdenhttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19171 Jonny Longden Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:45:39 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19171 Good post - I also recently posted on the same topic - take a look: http://actionable-analytics.com/2009/06/measuring-engagement-the-dangers-of-dwell-time/ Good post – I also recently posted on the same topic – take a look:

http://actionable-analytics.com/2009/06/measuring-engagement-the-dangers-of-dwell-time/

]]> By: Adam Tudorhttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19169 Adam Tudor Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:39:48 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19169 I think looking at it on it's own can be deceiving - as it's an average, looking at this overall average does not really give you much insight. Segmenting this measure can prove useful though - checking things like average time online for PPC visitors (and into specific campaigns) can help to detect potential clickfraud and poor quality visitors. Likewise, running this value against various organic keyword referrals, or specific landing page visitors can help to identify if some of these are performing poorly with very little time online. I think looking at it on it’s own can be deceiving – as it’s an average, looking at this overall average does not really give you much insight.

Segmenting this measure can prove useful though – checking things like average time online for PPC visitors (and into specific campaigns) can help to detect potential clickfraud and poor quality visitors. Likewise, running this value against various organic keyword referrals, or specific landing page visitors can help to identify if some of these are performing poorly with very little time online.

]]> By: Luke Stevenshttp://www.getelastic.com/is-analyzing-time-on-site-a-waste-of-time/comment-page-1/#comment-19167 Luke Stevens Sun, 16 Aug 2009 02:55:23 +0000 http://www.getelastic.com/?p=3138#comment-19167 Interesting post, but surely time on site is just one ingredient in the web analytics pie. Generalizations like "Longer or shorter time on site does not indicate site effectiveness" really need to be qualified, imo. Surely the answer is to do better analysis, rather than just throw the metric out. That means segment, segment, segment. For instance, to find out if it *does* indicate effectiveness, surely you would just segment out your quality customers from the riff-raff and see if time on site is different. Time on site could be the same for successful users who browse lots of catalog or product pages, and unsuccessful users who browse a lot of support pages, but again, segment them out and find out what's going on. If it turns out that unsuccessful users do have a lower (or higher) time on site, then that gives you a clue that something is hindering their experience - maybe they're sending time looking for something they can't find again, or hitting a road block (poor navigation, for eg) & leaving. Segment them out and see if you can uncover what it is :) Interesting post, but surely time on site is just one ingredient in the web analytics pie.

Generalizations like “Longer or shorter time on site does not indicate site effectiveness” really need to be qualified, imo.

Surely the answer is to do better analysis, rather than just throw the metric out. That means segment, segment, segment.

For instance, to find out if it *does* indicate effectiveness, surely you would just segment out your quality customers from the riff-raff and see if time on site is different.

Time on site could be the same for successful users who browse lots of catalog or product pages, and unsuccessful users who browse a lot of support pages, but again, segment them out and find out what’s going on.

If it turns out that unsuccessful users do have a lower (or higher) time on site, then that gives you a clue that something is hindering their experience – maybe they’re sending time looking for something they can’t find again, or hitting a road block (poor navigation, for eg) & leaving. Segment them out and see if you can uncover what it is :)

]]>