We've all heard people say "I won't follow you back if you don't have a link and bio" etc. But do people really mean it? Does having a bio and website link in your Twitter profile really make a difference in the number of followers you have? The answer is yes.
I dugg back into the data we've collected from Twitter Grader . We have a bunch of different information on over 1.6 million Twitter accounts, including bio, link and follower data.
The first "aha" moment from this slice of data is the sheer number of users without bios and links. Almost two-thirds of users don't have a bio or link listed on their Twitter profiles.
Looking at the average number of followers shows a very distinct trend. Users with a bio have over 8 times more followers on average than users without a bio and users with a link have over 7.5 times as many as users without.
Beyond sheer number of followers, power users are even less likely to follow you if you don't have a bio and link. (Power users are Twitter users with high Twitter Grades.)
Users with a bio have over 15.5 times more power followers than those without a bio. Users with a link have over 22 times more power followers than without.
And of course your Twitter Grader score is effected strongly.
The bottom line here is that if you haven't already specified a site and a bio for your Twitter profile (and lots of you haven't) go do it now.
Mark 9:38 AM on March 11, 2009
Very interesting stuff!
I haven't actually got around to doing a Bio. I'm off to do one now though and I'll be watching to see if my new followers increases.
Adrianna Dane 10:05 AM on March 11, 2009
I was just twittering about this very thing yesterday. Bio and link are a must. Good article.
Sanmaya 10:39 AM on March 11, 2009
Thanks for sharing this proof.
I usually do the same when following a new person. It is b'coz I can't know the exact name on twitter and I want to know who are those people I'm following. Sometimes it helps me to give them reply.
And a good trick to let people follow you is to comment on their posts or their website/profile as soon as you want to follow them. I experimented this and found it 100% successful where I use it. When I don't use this the success rate is just 10%. This way you can be in better contact with people
Thanks
Stephanie DeLuca 11:14 AM on March 11, 2009
Users that have a link and a bio lets someone know if it’s a real person and not spam. No one wants to follow someone if it’s just spam.
Clay S 11:20 AM on March 11, 2009
Dan,
Interesting post, thanks for sharing. I definitely check someone's bio typically before following.
However, I would argue that the real reason for the correlation here is because people w/o bios are new and inexperienced or inactive twitterers who aren't really following many people yet.
They don't have a bio, b/c they're still getting adjusted to the medium, and they don't have many followers because they haven't tweeted much yet or followed others. That's the reason for their low numbers not strictly because people don't follow those without bios.
Maybe run a report on # following for each demo, and I'll bet you see a similar, if not greater ratio as in the post.
Derek 12:41 PM on March 11, 2009
I would be curious about the # of followers for different types of links in one's profile: website home page, blog, specific landing page for Twitter users or something else. Or does it make a difference?
Pete Caputa 12:57 PM on March 11, 2009
Kinda common sense for anyone who uses Twitter more than a little bit. But, it's certainly interesting to see the data nonetheless.
al 2:18 PM on March 11, 2009
maybe they havn't posted a bio or link because no one is following them.
Greg Kathol 3:41 PM on March 11, 2009
I find that I always look at the person’s bio and link. If they don't have one, I rarely follow that person. I think the same holds true for most all of social media. If I can’t get even a little information about you, then why would I, fill in the blank (follow, link, connect, friend…) you? A certain level of transparency is key, just like in a face to face networking environment or simply meeting someone for the first time.
Jamie lovering 3:42 PM on March 11, 2009
Great article, i have been convinced to join twitter this week and have been looking for good information before i go ahead.
thank you
Leo 4:46 PM on March 11, 2009
I tend to agree with Clay: there is no proof that there exists a correlation "if you have a Bio you will get more followers". The correlation could be exactly the opposite ("the more followers you have the more interesting it would be to have a bio").
Or, as Clay states, there could be a third variable linking both (usage of Twitter; the more you use it, higher chances you have a bio and more followers)
Michael DiMella 5:44 PM on March 11, 2009
I suppose having a bio does not necessarily cause you to have more followers but it seems to make a lot of sense to have one anyway based on this data and the comments here. I certainly have no interest following people w/o a bio and link. Now if I could only figure out how to write a GOOD bio....
Matt Daniels 5:50 PM on March 11, 2009
looks like self selection...
Wayne Liew 9:35 AM on March 12, 2009
I tend to look at the bio when I choose whether to follow a person or not but the most important thing that I care about is their tweets. Good job on publishing the stats on this and I hope that people who are new on Twitter will have an interesting bio to increase their follower count instead of using some spammy scripts.
Darryl Praill 9:57 AM on March 12, 2009
Clay hit it on the mark - there is a correlation between bio/link and level of engagement. A casual or cautious commitment to Twitter is reflected in a reluctance to offer up personal information such as a bio or a link. It's all about engagement, baby.
krielly 10:07 AM on March 12, 2009
This makes perfect sense. I wouldn't respond to an email if the sender wasn't clear on who they were or their intentions for sending the email in the first place.
I view Twitter in the same manner. If someone does not have a bio, I don't feel as though they are validating their intentions on Twitter. Are they spammers, are they just following for the sake of following, etc.?
And especially on Twitter, there is no reason not to fill our a bio. It's only 140 characters worth of explanation! Bios and links show to the Twiterverse that you are, infact, a real person with a genuine desire to make connections.
Wendy R 1:57 PM on March 12, 2009
I was wondering about the question Clay posted as well, on other reasons casual users may not have many followers.
However, I really value having a bio to look at when I'm considering whether to follow someone, as not everyone uses their full or real name in their profile.
I'm off to create my own right now! Hello!
Christina Saunders 3:53 PM on March 12, 2009
Wow!!! Never realised the importance of this. Just updated my twitter profile pronto. Thank you for a great site. Just recommended it on my blog.
Justice O. Omorodion 12:34 PM on March 13, 2009
I totally agree to everything you pointed out there because all are fact. Not quite long ago I discovered the tips you point out about twitter bio and I quickly updated mine and the following rates jumped to 60% within 4 days.
Rachel Levy 3:09 PM on March 13, 2009
Great info! I'd love to see the data on avatars: pic vs. logo vs. default brown.
rob Whetzel 9:35 AM on March 14, 2009
Great information. Now I just have to get my twitter grade up. @digirob316
DM Patten 9:07 AM on March 17, 2009
Great research -
I'm one of those who always checks the individuals site if it's listed. I want to know what they are all about and what slant they may have on this or that. Also, I'm w/Rachel above - I'd love to see that data on avatar vs. no avatar and custom background vs. standard and see if that has any influence as well.
Thanks again!
--doug--
twitter.com/dmpatten
Jag SEO 11:43 AM on March 18, 2009
Interesting post, going to tweet this :)
Hjortur Smarason 9:42 AM on March 22, 2009
Intersting numbers, Dan. But this does not mean that having a bio and a link increases your follower return 8 times. That would be true if those with a bio and link and those who don't have it, would have put the same effort in building their network. They have not. Those who are serious about Twitter are more likely to have a bio and a link, those who have been a long time, those who are active etc. In the other half you have all the inactive accounts, people who have just signed up but never really done anything to build there network.
But I'm pretty sure there is a difference. I know for myself, and I'm what you call "a power user" that I don't follow back if there's no bio nor link. It looks fishy.
Dan 7:35 AM on May 09, 2009
Interesting stats. But how do you write a compelling Bio?
businessethos 10:06 PM on May 25, 2009
Awesome info! Thanks Hubspot...great info ....as always.
joanne saliby 11:23 PM on July 13, 2009
These comments all seem to be from the same source: style, etc. Theya all sound the same.