Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting

Objective – Patron counts are a common form of measurement for library assessment. To develop accurate library statistics, it is necessary to determine any differences between various counting devices. A yearlong comparison between card reader turnstiles and laser gate counters in a university libra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Jeffrey Phillips
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Alberta 2016-09-01
Series:Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Online Access:https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/27884
id doaj-d6267452dcb741f09d6269b01c218f46
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d6267452dcb741f09d6269b01c218f462020-11-25T02:05:33ZengUniversity of AlbertaEvidence Based Library and Information Practice1715-720X2016-09-0111310.18438/B8R90PDetermining Gate Count Reliability in a Library SettingJeffrey Phillips0Florida State UniversityObjective – Patron counts are a common form of measurement for library assessment. To develop accurate library statistics, it is necessary to determine any differences between various counting devices. A yearlong comparison between card reader turnstiles and laser gate counters in a university library sought to offer a standard percentage of variance and provide suggestions to increase the precision of counts. Methods – The collection of library exit counts identified the differences between turnstile and laser gate counter data. Statistical software helped to eliminate any inaccuracies in the collection of turnstile data, allowing this data set to be the base for comparison. Collection intervals were randomly determined and demonstrated periods of slow, average, and heavy traffic. Results – After analyzing 1,039,766 patron visits throughout a year, the final totals only showed a difference of .43% (.0043) between the two devices. The majority of collection periods did not exceed a difference of 3% between the counting instruments. Conclusion – Turnstiles card readers and laser gate counters provide similar levels of reliability when measuring patron activity. Each system has potential counting inaccuracies, but several methods exist to create more precise totals. Turnstile card readers are capable of offering greater detail involving patron identity, but their high cost makes them inaccessible for libraries with lower budgets. This makes laser gate counters an affordable alternative for reliable patron counting in an academic library.https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/27884
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jeffrey Phillips
spellingShingle Jeffrey Phillips
Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
author_facet Jeffrey Phillips
author_sort Jeffrey Phillips
title Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting
title_short Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting
title_full Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting
title_fullStr Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting
title_full_unstemmed Determining Gate Count Reliability in a Library Setting
title_sort determining gate count reliability in a library setting
publisher University of Alberta
series Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
issn 1715-720X
publishDate 2016-09-01
description Objective – Patron counts are a common form of measurement for library assessment. To develop accurate library statistics, it is necessary to determine any differences between various counting devices. A yearlong comparison between card reader turnstiles and laser gate counters in a university library sought to offer a standard percentage of variance and provide suggestions to increase the precision of counts. Methods – The collection of library exit counts identified the differences between turnstile and laser gate counter data. Statistical software helped to eliminate any inaccuracies in the collection of turnstile data, allowing this data set to be the base for comparison. Collection intervals were randomly determined and demonstrated periods of slow, average, and heavy traffic. Results – After analyzing 1,039,766 patron visits throughout a year, the final totals only showed a difference of .43% (.0043) between the two devices. The majority of collection periods did not exceed a difference of 3% between the counting instruments. Conclusion – Turnstiles card readers and laser gate counters provide similar levels of reliability when measuring patron activity. Each system has potential counting inaccuracies, but several methods exist to create more precise totals. Turnstile card readers are capable of offering greater detail involving patron identity, but their high cost makes them inaccessible for libraries with lower budgets. This makes laser gate counters an affordable alternative for reliable patron counting in an academic library.
url https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/27884
work_keys_str_mv AT jeffreyphillips determininggatecountreliabilityinalibrarysetting
_version_ 1724937559233003520