Search results

The LibQUAL+^TM instrument derives from the Gap Theory of Service Quality, and the SERVQUAL instrument. Grounded in the constructs of discrepancy theory, the SERVQUAL protocol itself, is anchored by a singular precept: through a series of 22 questions the SERVQUAL instrument undertakes to measure the delivery of service quality across the five dimensions: reliability, assurance, empathy, responsiveness, tangibles. It has been established as defining the service quality construct.

Various measurement models may be employed to obtain attitude or perception data. Some protocols employ a ‘gap measurement model’ to frame perceptions. One important benefit of using a gap measurement model is that tools such as LibQUAL??inherently incorporate a natural lie or random‐response scale. The present study investigates performance of scores on the scale for the 4407 LibQUAL??Phase One participants. This paper was presented at the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Measuring Service Quality Symposium on the New Culture of Assessment: Measuring Service Quality, Washington, DC, 20‐21 October, 2000.

Survey researchers sometimes develop large pools of items about which they seek participants' views. As a general proposition, library participants cannot reasonably be expected to respond to 100+ items on a given service quality assessment protocol. This paper seeks to describe the use of matrix sampling to reduce that burden on the participant.

Matrix sampling is a survey method that can be used to collect data on all survey items without requiring every participant to react to every survey question. Here the features of data are investigated from one such survey, the LibQUAL+^® Lite protocol, and the participation rates, completion times, and result comparisons across the two administration protocols – the traditional LibQUAL+^® protocol and the LibQUAL+^® Lite protocol – at each of the four institutions are explored.

Greater completion rates were realized with the LibQUAL+® Lite protocol.

The data from the Lite protocol might be the most accurate representation of the views of all the library users in a given community.

In 2009, in Performance Measurement and Metrics, the authors reported results of LibQUAL+® experiments at four universities in which the use of the LibQUAL+® Lite protocol was investigated. The purpose of this article is to briefly report related results for the first use of LibQUAL+® in Hebrew. The authors also take the opportunity to propose another method for equating scores across the LibQUAL+® Lite and the traditional LibQUAL+® protocols.

Matrix sampling is a survey method which can be used to collect data on all survey items without requiring every participant to react to every survey question. Here, the authors investigate the features of data from one such survey, the LibQUAL+® Lite protocol, exploring the participation rates, completion times, and result comparisons across the two administration protocols – the traditional LibQUAL+® protocol and the LibQUAL+® Lite protocol – at an Israeli University and for the first time, in Hebrew.

This experimental approach confirms the previous work which showed that greater completion rates were realized with the LibQUAL+® Lite protocol. The data from the Lite protocol might be the most accurate representation of the views of all the library users in a given community.

This is the first time LibQUAL+® has been used in Hebrew.

This paper aims to explain how the integrity or trustworthiness of library service quality assessment data can be evaluated. Using the metaphor of a bathroom scale, the paper also aims to present the ideas underlying score reliability and score validity in an accessible manner.

The use of the software, SPSS, to compute the related statistics is illustrated. LibQUAL+® data are used in heuristic examples, to make the discussion concrete, but the illustrations apply to both new and other measures of library service quality.

The paper suggests that assumptions about the quality of data should always be empirically checked whenever an attempt is made to characterize service quality.

This user‐friendly, conversational paper explains some of the more critical elements of service quality assessment.

Selecting, installing, and implementing an integrated library system is a time consuming and expensive undertaking. Factors that can result in disappointment (and even regret) are always present, and must be anticipated, recognized and properly handled. The experiences of libraries (that were in the vanguard of those installing automated sytems) provide an important resource from which other libraries can benefit. The experience of Texas A&M with the selection and implementation of DataPhase system is a particularly interesting (on‐going) case study. Two sidebars present the current perspectives of DataPhase Corporation and the Texas A&M University Library administration.

The work described in this paper aims to reflect the natural evolution of longstanding dialogue between the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), Johns Hopkins University (JHU), and Bielefeld University.

This study looks at how each institution has combined library and assessment expertise and developed evaluation methodologies that emphasize different, but interrelated aspects of library services.

The resulting tools may be viewed as an integrated decision support system (DSS) that can offer librarians and library administrators a comprehensive framework for choosing appropriate tools, methodologies, and resources for evaluation of both existing and future library services.

This paper provides an excellent introduction and overview for practitioners new to the topics described.