We are all barraged by numbers every day. It is my job, as a data scientist, to ensure that the statistics I report are accurate. The quality and accuracy of Chartbeat data are of utmost importance to me, and these are things I take very seriously. I am proud of the hard work that our team does to ensure that the information we provide to you is as accurate as humanly possible.Here’s the thing: I made a mistake. Last week, I presented findings at a GEN Summit Masterclass and after further analysis, I have discovered that several of the numbers that I presented, and which I subsequently blogged about, warrant corrections. I calculated these numbers via a custom data pull and analysis, and there was human error involved. I have since rerun the analysis, corrected the faulty numbers, and have reposted my Masterclass slides to Slideshare with an intro calling out the changes.Below are the key corrections:
- Socially loyal visits are not greater than directly loyal visits as initially presented.
- For both the EU and the US, the number of socially loyal visits is only a third of directly loyal visits. If you hold out Dark Social from this number and consider only social traffic with a specified referrer (which you may or may not want to do) the numbers drop to less than 5% for the EU and 10% for the US. That is, socially loyal visits are much, much less common than directly loyal visits.
- Mobile visits to an article are still extremely high, but slightly lower than initially presented.
- Over 70% of mobile visits in the US and over 60% of mobile visits in the EU were to an article. (The previous finding was that 80% of mobile visits in both regions were to articles.)
I apologize but I’m glad to have the chance to make these corrections. If you have any questions, feel free to email me at firstname.lastname@example.org or tweet me @dpvalente.