Grab a cup of coffee and a comfy chair in front of the fire. Introduce yourself, ask questions, share ideas, and chat about what’s going on!

Analytic availability

3 replies, 3 voices Last updated by Émilie Pagé-Perron 6 years, 11 months ago
Viewing 3 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #519

      Colin Greenstreet
      Member
      @marinelives

      What is available and what is planned in terms of an analytics package? I’m not making a request, since I suspect your feature development queue is already excessive, but I am raising a question.

       

      The most useful innovation I have seen in Academia.edu in the last six months is the introduction of improved analytics. Specifically, it is possible to see how many pages people are reading of specific documents. There is a big difference between a casual click on a document and actually scrolling through the whole PDF at a pace which suggests the viewer is actually reading it.

       

      Interestingly, the newish feature on Academia.edu I find unsuccessful is the use of sessions. Either limited responses (though plenty of members of a session), or pretty bland or dumb comments. I suspect that this is down to the relative anonymity of the platform and its sheer scale.  The pleasure of Humanities Commons at the moment is that I can Tweet a dumb question and get a near instantaneous reply. But at scale that won’t be possible with Humanities Commons. Again, what I like about the tiny exposure I have had to HC is the sense of the existence of scholarly communities with personalities and that one can have a discussion within those communities – it may seem strange, but I get a sense of support and engagement from my interactions on Twitter with a diverse set of scholars and non-scholars which is personal, but feel nothing personal about Academia.edu. Basically, HC feels like it has been structured around discussion, with the document repository as a support, whereas Academia.edu feels like it is structured around documents and scale of documents, with a weak culture of mutual exchange.

       

      I would be interested if other HC, Twitter and Academia.edu users have similar or different experiences?

       

    • #1405

      Paolo Aranha
      Participant
      @paoloaranha

      Colin, I think your analysis is very accurate: one of the many problems with Academia.edu is the lack of discussion and interaction.

      I also would like to have some enhanced Analytics on HC, although I also think we should undertake a reflection on the best balance between each one’s right to privacy and the undeniable utility of data on the reception of our publications etc.

      I have tried Academia.edu Premium for one month and I could check who was reading any of my articles. On the one hand this could be interesting, but on the other it was a sort of spying: very likely most of the readers didn’t even imagine that I could check them. I assume that a possible solution could be allowing each reader to decider whether to reveal or not the author about one’s own reading and downloading activities.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 1 month ago by Paolo Aranha.
    • #1732

      Colin Greenstreet
      Member
      @marinelives

      Hi Paolo, Yes, I have also tried premium and think the who is reading what is the best aspect of that service. I agree with your point about the user having control of his/her own “broadcast” vs “privacy” settings

       

    • #2723

      Émilie Pagé-Perron
      Member
      @sohnyrin

      I also would really like to have advanced analytics but only anonymized ones.

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • Only members can participate in this group's discussions.