Web traffic and campus trends: a multi-institution analysis�
Jon Jablonski, University of Oregon Libraries�Robin Paynter, Portland State University Library�Laura Zeigen, Oregon Health & Science Univ. Library
Why we did this project
Web Log Analysis Methodologies
Conceptual Framework /
Inquiry
Phenomenology /
Ethnomethodology
Content Analysis
Ethnography
Historical Method
Discourse Analysis
Case Study
*Jansen, B. J., Spink, A., & Taksai, I. (2009). Handbook of research on web log analysis.
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. p 507
Conceptual Framework definition*
“These studies usually introduce
a set of concepts related to an
existing (or future systems), or
to a set of objects, or to behavior
aspects of participants. Concepts
are then used to construct
conceptual frameworks, which
provide the plan, purpose and
direction for the study. Depending
on the goals, data, and technology
the conceptual frameworks offer
a choice of methodologies:
surveys, data analysis, literature
review or many others.”
Conceptual Framework/Inquiry
Transaction Log Analysis
Search Log Analysis
Complementary Methods
Key Performance Indicators
Definitions*
Transaction log analysis:
“analysis of Web system logs”
Blog analysis:
“analysis of Web blogs”
Search log analysis:
“analysis of search engine logs”
* Jansen, Spink & Taksai, p. 508
Transaction Log Analysis
Behavioral vs. intentional
Server vs. client side
Cache vs. cache busting
Proxy servers | Fixed/Dynamic IPs
Flash cookies vs. cookies
Page tagging
Web 2.0 (blogs, RSS, social networking)
Analysis packages (AWStats vs.
Php my visits)
Public computers with default library
homepage
Website links to other servers
Campus portals, other access venues
Server not reporting data
■ Hit *
■ Unique visitors
■ New/Return visitors
■ Page views
■ Page views per visitor
■ Visit duration
■ IP address
■ Visitor location
■ Visitor language
■ Referring pages/sites (URLs)
■ Keywords
■ Browser type
■ Operating system version
■ Screen resolution
■ Java or Flash-enabled
■ Connection speed
■ Errors
■ Visitor paths/navigation
■ Bounce rate
* Napier, H., Judd, P., Rivers, O., & Adams, A. (2003). E-business technologies (pp. 372-380).
Boston, MA: Thomas Course Technology.
Key Performance Indicators
Return visitors or unique visitors?
(or looking for seasonal changes, i.e. fall more new
and spring more returning visitors?
High page views?
What are key metrics for academic library websites?
Same as commercial websites?
Visit duration? (Shorter or longer better?)
Is benchmarking possible, useful and/or desirable?
Trends in data? (e.g., fewer error messages=improved user experience)
*Cohen, L. B. A Two-Tiered Model for Analyzing Library Website Usage Statistics, Part 2: Log File Analysis.
Portal v. 3 no. 3 (July 2003) p. 517-26
Different KPIs for administrators and designers*
OHSU Unique Visitors
OHSU Number of Visits
OHSU Page Views
OHSU Hits
What we looked at
42 (or 47) links overall on homepage.
6 to non-www library servers.�
2 to non-library pages
Leaving 39 links that get counted.*
*not counting Facebook, Twitter and H1N1.
Leaving 31 links that get counted
18 links counted
catalog or other pages where
links go to resources not on
the OHSU web server.
A-Z journals and databases go
to another web server page.
all links from those pages are
routed through the catalog or
our EZProxy server
OHSU
Medical Schools and Medical Centers
Largely graduate, professional programs of later life adult students, many of whom have families, some of whom are employed part or full time while they are going to school full time.
Portland State �Doctoral/Research Universities-Intensive university
Until recently been primarily a teaching university��Student body largely composed of later life adult students, who are employed (full or part-time) and have families. ~39% attend part-time. ��Graduate student population largely�in professional schools (social work, education, urban planning, etc).
University of Oregon
Doctoral/Research Universities-Extensive university
Student body largely composed of young adults going to school full time.
Many work part time while going to school.
Comparison across institutions
Traffic follows the academic terms…� …except for OHSU, which doesn’t have a strong term system.� …and PSU doesn’t appear to take spring break.
Page views per month
Re-graphing fixes scale problem.
*But PSU still doesn’t seem to have a spring break.
But what about the scale difference?
| UO | PDX | OHSU |
Apr-08 | 104,352 | 10,110 | 9,682 |
May-08 | 105,337 | 12,466 | 8,584 |
Jun-08 | 110,773 | 18,350 | 11,755 |
Month | UO (2008) | PSU (2009) | OHSU (2008) |
Jan | 1,626,357 | 264,529 | 572,178 |
Feb | 1,890,241 | 299,180 | 604,895 |
Mar | 1,697,888 | 324,171 | 607,958 |
Apr | 1,913,613 | 345,586 | 862,900 |
May | 1,817,830 | 324,230 | 883,564 |
Jun | 1,402,282 | 246,388 | 783,779 |
Unique visitors
Pageviews
| UO | PSU | OHSU |
undergrads | 16,681 | 21,674 | |
grads | 3,695 | 6,298 | |
| 20,376 | 27,972 | |
| | | ~11,000 FTE |
faculty | 1,714 | 1,477 | |
degrees | 5,177 | 4,966 | |
Can these results be true?
Figure 1 graph: Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., & Jamali, H. R. (2007). Diversity in the information seeking behaviour
of the virtual scholar: Institutional comparisons. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33, 629-638. (p.632)
Our study analyzed web server transaction logs, and the Nicholas et al. study analyzed journal database
usage across four institution types….still the resemblance in page view data by institution type is interesting
Visits per day of week
Spring term, 2008
Visits per day of week: aggregate
Spring term, 2008
Normalized
Visits per day of week: average
Spring term, 2008
Normalized
Compare types of pages
Comparision: Most viewed pages
Homepage
Other top-level pages
Content
Department homepages
Tools
Administrative/operations
‘How to’ pages
OHSU
14%
PSU
79% of total traffic
UO
57%
Top viewed?
Visits per day: by week of term.
Visits per day: by week of term.
Now what?
Challenges in process/points to ponder
Resources
Contact information