As 2017 ended, analyses of the initial pilots for Remarq® revealed how effectively the product increases engagement for editors, authors, and publishers.
We compared statistics before and after activation of Remarq in some cases, but also were able to compare Remarq journals to non-Remarq journals in portfolios where Remarq was only placed on a subset of titles. Using the first 60 journals employing Remarq as the population, we found a comparative effect and a portfolio effect.
The comparative effect is self-explanatory — how Remarq journals compared to journals in the same publisher portfolio to journals without Remarq:
- Users return for 3-4 times as many sessions on Remarq-enabled journals
- Users of Remarq journals make twice as many article visits
- Users spend 27% more time on Remarq titles
- Remarq journals attracted three times more unique users
- Users of Remarq journals are 36-64% more likely to visit on any particular day
We also noted a “portfolio effect,” which we define as the general lift a portfolio receives from supporting readers as they explore related titles in the same portfolio. One general observation we’ve been able to make is that readers do visit related titles in a publisher’s portfolio, either by dint of following citations, heeding article recommendations or alerts, or using search tools.
- Journals with Remarq experienced a 10% lower bounce rate, for both new and returning users, after Remarq was deployed
- Readers consumed 7-14% more full-text articles across a portfolio after Remarq was deployed
One of the more interesting findings involves the question of “depth of read,” a metric that editors and authors both care about. After all, if readers only skim an abstract, that’s not the deep reading of content. Important nuances can be lost, and critical data missed. Our analysis showed that:
- On Remarq-enabled journals, users spend 21% more time on full-text, while spending 15% less time on abstracts
Our conclusion is that the toolset Remarq enables encourages deep reading, making it more rewarding as users can markup articles, share content and snippets, and collaborate around ideas and key elements.
These early data should be taken in stride, as results will certainly vary over time and depending on the level of engagement your audience already has with your content. However, we’re encouraged by these trend lines, which shows Remarq performing well compared to non-Remarq journals in the same portfolio, while also improving performance across portfolios when deployed generally. We also feel that as Remarq becomes more widely adopted and makes collaboration more commonplace and viable generally, these trendlines may well improve.
If you’d like to know more about Remarq and how easy it is to adopt, please visit http://remarqable.com or contact us.