usage

[Jonathan Rochkind]

Did you guys notice that Google analytics said we got 1700 "visits" to
the journal on Tuesday Mar 25, really our first full day issue 2 was
out? Assuming Google really does mean "unique visitors" (as far as it
can tell), that's pretty good for the second issue of a new journal!

Of course, many people that visit the ToC don't read the articles--at
least not that same day, but I guess people will read the ones they are
interested in, as they have time.

The past few days had 400 and 500 hits a day, so people are looking.
Hooray.

Jonathan

--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu

[Jonathan Rochkind]

PS: I kind of wonder why issue 2 is getting so much more traffic than
issue 1 ever did, but, hey, I guess it takes some time for people to
hear about it, for issue 2 isn't so bad. Issue one around 100 visitors
a day, including the first week (when we publisized it widely). Issue 2,
publisized LESS widely intentionally by us, has only gone below 300 on
the weekend since publication.

The fact that we had a huge spike in traffic after issue 2 was
published, which has remained far above the levels of pre-issue 2
publication, seems to be further justification for the
release-as-an-issue release schedule. Many of those people must have
heard about the journal some time after issue 1 was out, but before Mar
25 (especially because we didn't do much issue 2 marketting)--but if so,
they didn't visit to look at issue 1, they visited only when issue 2
came out.

Nice work all!

Jonathan

[Eric Lease Morgan]

On Apr 2, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:

> PS: I kind of wonder why issue 2 is getting so much more traffic than
> issue 1 ever did, but, hey, I guess it takes some time for people to
> hear about it, for issue 2 isn't so bad. Issue one around 100
> visitors
> a day, including the first week (when we publisized it widely).
> Issue 2,
> publisized LESS widely intentionally by us, has only gone below 300 on
> the weekend since publication.

I'm not sure, but I think the traffic to the journal for Issue #2 was
very similar to Issue #1, as illustrated by the attached PNG file. I
changed the date ranges of graph and I think it is more interesting
that nobody looks at the journal except when it is announced. People
have short attention spans.

--
Eric

[Edward Corrado]

This is great. I often wonder how hits should count versus subscriptions for P&T. At my current job and judging what I have seen elsewhere the number of subscriptions counts for something in evaluating scholarship (not necessarily a large percentage, but it still counts). I think this is outdated, even in traditional print-focused journals. Even if it were a traditional journal, it may be in databases and downloaded often, At any rate, I think it is great that we are seeing a spike. I think, or at least hope, this will continue as we release additional issues.

Edward

[Jonathan Rochkind]

Hmm, i wonder why that chart looks different then the one I was looking
at, at, "Visits", at:

https://www.google.com/analytics/reporting/visits?id=6216773&pdr=20080303-20080402&cmp=average

I then realized there was a different link for "absolute unique
visitors", which is probably what I actually wanted, but that one too
shows the same traffic pattern (just about 10% less than "visits" that
aren't "absolute unique").

https://www.google.com/analytics/reporting/unique_visitors?id=6216773&pdr=20080219-20080403&cmp=average

Lies, damn lies, statistics.

Jonathan

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------