Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
LibQUAL Service Quality Assessment/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

LibQUAL Service Quality Assessment

LibQUAL+ is a standardized survey method for measuring library service quality from the user's point of view, built on the gap-analysis logic of the SERVQUAL instrument from marketing. For each survey item, users supply three ratings, the minimum service they would find acceptable, the service they desire, and the service they actually perceive, and the method computes gap scores from these: an adequacy gap (perceived minus minimum) and a superiority gap (perceived minus desired). The space between minimum and desired defines a zone of tolerance, and the analysis reveals which services fall below it, sit within it, or exceed it. Developed by Colleen Cook, Fred Heath, and Bruce Thompson under the Association of Research Libraries and validated across hundreds of institutions, LibQUAL+ organizes items into dimensions such as Affect of Service, Information Control, and Library as Place.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

LibQUAL+ Service Quality Assessment (Gap-Based Library Service Quality Measurement)
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / library-information-science
  • Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, B. (2001). Users' Hierarchical Perspectives on Library Service Quality: A 'LibQUAL+' Study. College & Research Libraries, 62(2), 147-153. · DOI 10.5860/crl.62.2.147
  • Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40. · URL
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Same method familyDiscovery Interface Usability Testingmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyReference Transaction Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

2 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto