Why is my Average Time on Page so Low in Google Analytics?

Author:
 

I was egotistically checking analytics on my own blog posts yesterday and I was getting a little bummed, because I appear to have a low time on page. A low time on page would make me think that people aren’t actually reading my blog posts.

See? Only 25 seconds! My blog posts are kind of long-winded, so it seems unlikely that you could read the whole thing in 25 seconds, especially on average. Some people are slow readers, after all.

So then I was trying to diagnose it and I broke it down by city. I noticed when I did this that there are a lot of them that have zero seconds! I couldn’t believe my writing is so horrible that users would want to leave immediately…

But then I remembered something I learned a while ago about how Google Analytics measures time. Google Analytics makes a time stamp every time you load the page. So when you first enter the site, it makes a timestamp of 00:00:00 seconds. When you navigate to the next page, Google Analytics makes another timestamp.

So if I land on a blog entry about an awesome paid search infographic, I start with a timestamp of 00:00:00. After oohing and aahing over the images for 21 seconds, I then click on a link to another blog entry on the same site, and get another timestamp when that next page loads of 00:00:21.

However, if I landed on the blog entry, oohed and aahed for 21 seconds, and then left the site – which is perfectly normal to do with blog entries or any kind of purely informational content – Google Analytics doesn’t have a second timestamp for me, so it doesn’t know how long I’ve been on the site. So my highlighted zeroes in the screenshot above could be ten minutes for all I know.

So let’s look at an example:

In the above example, GA sees page B as having a time on page of 20 seconds, because it can subtract the timestamp on page B’s page load (00:00:32) from the third page load timestamp (00:00:52).

However, for Page A, it doesn’t fully know how long the visitor viewed that page. It knows that the first time the user saw Page A, they were on there for 32 seconds. GA knows this because of the timestamp from the next page load of 00:00:32. But on the last visit to Page A, because they exited the site from this page, there is no additional timestamp to help determine the time on page.

So, what you’re saying is this number isn’t reliable at all? Sort of. When Google Analytics calculates average time on page, they do attempt to account for pages with no secondary timestamp by subtracting the number of exits. So the calculation for average time on page is literally:

Average Time on Page = Total Time on Page ÷ (Pageviews – Exits)

But even accounting for exits, if you have a lot of pages that have bounces (someone lands on the blog entry, reads it, and leaves without clicking to any other page) you will be missing out on a huge percentage of your total time on page. For a blog, this is fairly common behavior. Even if users click on an icon to Facebook, which is a desired action for many blog entries, it looks like a bounce.

Edit from February 25, 2013: I realized that in the above paragraph I didn’t clarify that the number of exits would include the number of bounces. So what I mean is that if you have a lot of bounces on your pages (which blog entries naturally do) this will greatly reduce the sample size of pageviews that you get as a result of the (Pageviews – Exits) piece of the equation. While your page may have hundreds of pageviews, if it is a blog entry and has a lot of bounces as well, your average time on site may be calculated by a sample of only tens of pageviews. Hope that clarification helps!

So if you’re going to use metrics like Average Time on Page and Average Visit Duration (which works the same way as time on page), just please use them with a grain of salt, especially when doing analysis for content like blogs and infographics.

Enhanced by Zemanta
 

10 thoughts on “Why is my Average Time on Page so Low in Google Analytics?

  1. Thanks for the great post! I’m rather obsessive about my analytics and I’ve always wondered why I had so many of those blasted 00:00:00 results. It all makes sense now. Thanks again. -Patrick

  2. Thanks for breaking this down so clearly. I wish Analytics would come up with a better way to measure for blogs. Because with most blogs, a landing page will hold 5 -7 posts, just by scrolling down. A visitor may read all of your posts, but they don’t have to click on any other links, so this doesn’t register.

    Therefore, where blogs are concerned there’s no accurate accounting for entrances/ exits and duration on page. I mostly look at the number of Unique Page Views and the number of direct visits vs search visits and keep it moving.

  3. Thank you. I couldn’t understand how my teaching pages had lower avg time than my entry pages. I googled the specific question about low avg duration and found this great article. Makes sense but still not happy seeing the avg duration time so low on my teaching pages.

  4. Great. Thanks for this. I was wondering why I had so many 0 – 10 second visitors on my tumblog (obviously just one page). It now makes sense. I’ll look at your links to see how I can get a better analysis.

    1. You’re welcome Carin! Feel free to reach back out to us if you have any issues interpreting the info in those links.

  5. This has been such a massive demotivator. Every time I check my stats, I am first amazed by the places that my visitors come from, and then am floored by their spending 0 time! Someone said that all they need to do is click on another page, as have you, which only makes me feel worse, because that would mean that they didn’t follow a backlink or category tab to another page. Oh my, no one said blogging would be such a humbling experience.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *