JD_Toims - 4:48 am on Sep 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
I think that if you have engaging content measured loosely by a healthy time on site and a low bounce rate for those pages then you may succeed.
I think you're on-the-right-track, but I would warn [you and all readers] bounce-rate and time-on-site are *not* things you should try to "manipulate" for ranking purposes, because manipulation of numbers really doesn't help in rankings.
Those numbers are things you should use as signals/clues to understand visitor behavior as related to query and information-provided on a given page *internally*, so you can try to better match visitors to the results served by search engines and provide visitors with the answer they are searching for on the first page they visit.
As far as bounce-rate goes, I've posted previously I've had [and may still have] pages on sites with a +90% bounce-rate [and that's bad, or so I keep reading] rank in the top 3 [for years] for the queries they were designed to rank for, but I don't mind since I can look at the time-on-site + query made and compare those to bounce-rate and know the bounce-rate is high because, visitors found a "match" to their query on the *first* page they visited.
One thing, contrary to popular belief, a high bounce-rate [shown by most stat programs as one page-view/visit regardless of time-on-site and close rate] can tell you is: You did your job by getting the content right and the search engines did their job by ranking the correct page for a visitor to find what they were searching for with a single click on a result -- I've had more than one page like this [based on query made, on-page content, time spent on the landing page, sales increase] and might still have some* on a site or two.
* I haven't checked on the sites I'm referring to recently, because it's not that important to me as long as the revenue from the sites keeps increasing even though I haven't touched them other than to correct "glitches" that have been pointed out in years.
BTW: Welcome to WebmasterWorld!