1 yr mark
Labrigger has been going for one year now.
105
Blog posts to date. That’s 0.29/day.
12.2%
Average monthly increase in traffic. This is excluding the first few months of exponential growth. Right now the traffic per day is in the hundreds.
81.5%
Portion of visitors who do not come via a search engine. They either type in the address, use a bookmark, or click a link in email. This means that the site traffic is not simply a bunch of Google references, they are likely return visitors.
6.8%
Portion of visitors who do come in via a search engine, and the search term is “labrigger” (1.3% of total traffic). These should count as direct hits as well. Again, this means that the traffic is not accidental.
6.25
Minutes the average visit lasts. One thing that has been pleasantly surprising is that many visitors spend quite some time on the site. Some people just hammer the RSS feed to see new posts, which is what I would expect, but many visitors view multiple pages on the site.
3.7
Average number of pages viewed per visitor. This includes clicking the tag field to the right, browsing old posts, and looking at comment threads. Again, visitors actually poke around a bit on their visits. Not everyone is simply looking for the newest posts (which is also fine, of course).
Traffic comes from all over… here is a partial list of research institutions that have shown up in the logs:
Stanford, Caltech, Columbia, various Max Plank Institutes, Janelia Farm, Harvard, UCSD, EPFL, UCLA, University of Paris, Oregon, RIKEN, Rockefeller, Northwestern, UC Davis, UCSB, MIT, NTNU, Princeton, University of Tokyo, Yale, USC, Carnegie Mellon, UCSF, UC Davis, Salk, NIH, UT Austin, and so on…
We hope you find Labrigger useful and continue to visit the site, comment on posts, and tell your friends and colleagues about it. Our email address is at the bottom right of the page for tips, comments, and any other communication.
Note for the web traffic analysis aficionados: all of the above analysis excludes traffic from spiders, robots, worms, and special HTTP codes.
Congrats! The quality is there.
I do wish there were more quality neuroscience blogs on the whole. I’ve tried subscribing to the scienceblogging neuro feed but got swamped by posts about MRI, autism/social anxiety/schizophrenia, personal or touchy-feely stuff. I don’t care about any of that; give me math, hardware, and other awesome stuff. There ought to be an aggregator that’s focused on this kind of stuff (I would hesitate to call it computional neuroscience; it’s a bit wider than that); the difficulty building traffic by oneself has discouraged many a promising blogger.
Anyways, keep it up.