National Academies Press: OpenBook

Passenger Counting Systems (2008)

Chapter: Front Matter

Page i
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R1
Page ii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R2
Page iii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R3
Page iv
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R4
Page v
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R5
Page vi
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R6
Page vii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R7
Page viii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R8
Page ix
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Passenger Counting Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14207.
×
Page R9

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Passenger Counting Systems TCRP SyntheSiS 77 A Synthesis of Transit Practice Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration tranSit cooperative reSearch program

TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT SELECTION COMMITTEE* CHAIR ROBERT I. BROWNSTEIN AECOM Consult, Inc. MEMBERS ANN AUGUST Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority JOHN BARTOSIEWICZ McDonald Transit Associates MICHAEL BLAYLOCK Jacksonville Transportation Authority LINDA J. BOHLINGER HNTB Corp. RAUL BRAVO Raul V. Bravo & Associates GREGORY COOK Veolia Transportation TERRY GARCIA CREWS StarTran NATHANIEL P. FORD, JR. SF Municipal Transportation Agency KIM R. GREEN GFI GENFARE JILL A. HOUGH North Dakota State University ANGELA IANNUZZIELLO ENTRA Consultants JOHN INGLISH Utah Transit Authority JEANNE W. KRIEG Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority DAVID A. LEE Connecticut Transit CLARENCE W. MARSELLA Denver Regional Transportation District GARY W. MCNEIL GO Transit MICHAEL P. MELANIPHY Motor Coach Industries FRANK OTERO PACO Technologies KEITH PARKER Charlotte Area Transit System MICHAEL SCANLON San Mateo County Transit District BEVERLY SCOTT Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority JAMES S. SIMPSON FTA JAMES STEM United Transportation Union FRANK TOBEY First Transit EX OFFICIO MEMBERS WILLIAM W. MILLAR APTA ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR. TRB JOHN C. HORSLEY AASHTO THOMAS J. MADISON, JR. FHWA TDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LOUIS SANDERS APTA SECRETARY CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS TRB *Membership as of September 2008.*Membership as of September 2008. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2008 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS Chair: Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka Vice Chair: Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. BARRY BARKER, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY ALLEN D. BIEHLER, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg JOHN D. BOWE, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA LARRY L. BROWN, SR., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson DEBORAH H. BUTLER, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA WILLIAM A.V. CLARK, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles DAVID S. EKERN, Commissioner, Virginia DOT, Richmond NICHOLAS J. GARBER, Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville JEFFREY W. HAMIEL, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, MN EDWARD A. (NED) HELME, President, Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC WILL KEMPTON, Director, California DOT, Sacramento SUSAN MARTINOVICH, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City MICHAEL D. MEYER, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta MICHAEL R. MORRIS, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington NEIL J. PEDERSEN, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore PETE K. RAHN, Director, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City SANDRA ROSENBLOOM, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson TRACY L. ROSSER, Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR ROSA CLAUSELL ROUNTREE, Executive Director, Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta HENRY G. (GERRY) SCHWARTZ, JR., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO C. MICHAEL WALTON, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin LINDA S. WATSON, CEO, LYNX–Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando STEVE WILLIAMS, Chairman and CEO, Maverick Transportation, Inc., Little Rock, AR EX OFFICIO MEMBERS THAD ALLEN (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT REBECCA M. BREWSTER, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA PAUL R. BRUBAKER, Research and Innovative Technology Administrator, U.S.DOT GEORGE BUGLIARELLO, Chancellor, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn, and Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC SEAN T. CONNAUGHTON, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT LEROY GISHI, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC EDWARD R. HAMBERGER, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC JOHN H. HILL, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT JOHN C. HORSLEY, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC CARL T. JOHNSON, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT J. EDWARD JOHNSON, Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, John C. Stennis Space Center, MS THOMAS J. MADISON, JR., Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT WILLIAM W. MILLAR, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC NICOLE R. NASON, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT JAMES S. SIMPSON, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT ROBERT A. STURGELL, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT ROBERT L. VAN ANTWERP (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC

TransporTaTion research Board Washington, D.C. 2008 www.tRB.org TRANS IT COOPERAT IVE RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP SYNTHESIS 77 Research sponsored by the Federal transit administration in Cooperation with the transit Development Corporation Subject AreAS Public transit Passenger Counting Systems A Synthesis of Transit Practice conSultAnt DANIEL BOYLE Dan Boyle and associates san Diego, California

TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nation’s growth and the need to meet mobility, environ- mental, and energy objectives place demands on public tran- sit systems. Current systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Spe- cial Report 213—Research for Public Transit: New Direc- tions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Trans- portation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the longstanding and successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program, undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of transit service providers. The scope of TCRP includes a variety of transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Proposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was authorized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transpor- tation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooperating organizations: FTA, the National Academy of Sciences, acting through the Transpor- tation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Development Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research organization established by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited peri- odically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Committee to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Committee defines fund- ing levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel, appointed by TRB. The panels prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide tech- nical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in man- aging cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Because research cannot have the desired impact if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on disseminating TCRP results to the intended end users of the research: transit agencies, service providers, and suppli- ers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other supporting material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. The TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. The TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. TCRP SYNTHESIS 77 Project J-7, Topic SA-18 ISSN 1073-4880 ISBN 978-0-309-09819-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2008908990 © 2008 Transportation Research Board COPYRIGHT PERMISSION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropri- ate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced mate- rial. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. noTice The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the Tran- sit Cooperative Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the project concerned is appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical advisory panel selected to moni- tor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical panel, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the Transit Development Corporation, the National Research Council, or the Federal Transit Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the tech- nical panel according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Govern- ing Board of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board of The National Academies, the Transit Development Corporation, the National Research Council, and the Federal Transit Administration (sponsor of the Transit Cooperative Research Program) do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the clarity and completeness of the project reporting. Published reports of the TransiT cooperaTiVe research proGraM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America

thE nationaL aCaDEMiEs Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol- ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Acad- emy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initia- tive, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sci- ences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and prog- ress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdis- ciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation depart- ments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

Tcrp coMMiTTee For proJecT J-7 chair DWIGHT A. FERRELL, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority MeMBers DEBRA W. ALEXANDER Capital Area Transportation Authority, Lansing, MI MARK W. FURHMANN Metro Transit, Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN ROBERT H. IRWIN Consultant, Calgary, AB, Canada DONNA KELSAY San Joaquin Regional Transit District, Stockton, CA PAUL J. LARROUSSE Rutgers,The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick WADE LAWSON South Jersey Transportation Authority, Atlantic City DAVID LEE Connecticut Transit, Hartford FRANK T. MARTIN PSB&J, Tallahassee, FL DAVID PHELPS LTK Engineering Services, Moneta, VA HAYWARD M. SEYMORE, III Q Straint, University Place, WA PAM WARD Ottumwa Transit Authority, Ottumwa, IA JOEL R. WASHINGTON Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Washington, DC FTa Liaison LISA COLBERT Federal Transit Administration TrB Liaison PETER SHAW Transportation Research Board Cover Figure: Ride connection passenger transfers from TriMet bus to shuttle. cooperaTiVe research proGraMs sTaFF CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research Programs CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs GWEN CHISHOLM SMITH, Senior Program Officer EILEEN DELANEY, Director of Publications Tcrp sYnThesis sTaFF STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs JON M. WILLIAMS, Associate Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer DON TIPPMAN, Editor CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant Topic paneL FABIAN CEVALLOS, Florida International University KATHRYN COFFEL, Kittelson and Associates, Portland, OR THOMAS FRIEDMAN, King County (WA) Metro Transit JOEL KOFFMAN, Ottawa, ON, Canada HENRY KWEE, Akron, Ohio PETER SHAW, Transportation Research Board STEVEN SILKUNAS, Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority CHARLENE WILDER, Federal Transit Administration (Liaison) LOUIS F. SANDERS, American Public Transportation Association (Liaison)

Transit administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which informa- tion already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac- tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviat- ing the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the transit industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire transit community, the Transit Cooperative Research Program Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, TCRP Project J-7, “Synthesis of Information Related to Transit Problems,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute a TCRP report series, Synthesis of Transit Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, with- out the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. The purpose of this synthesis is to document the state of the practice in terms of analytical tools and technologies for collecting transit ridership and other subsidiary data. It provides advice for transit agencies considering automatic passenger counter (APC) systems. Sur- vey results include transit agency assessments of the effectiveness and reliability of their methodologies and of desired improvements. The survey was designed to emphasize APC systems; however, agencies using manual systems were also surveyed to gain an under- standing of the reasons that new technologies have not been adopted. Detailed findings from six case studies characterize individual “best practice,” as well as highlight problems common to APC implementation. An appendix summarizes APC implementation, includ- ing the percentage of vehicles equipped with APCs, hardware supplier, software supplier, and the procurement process for each agency. This report was accomplished through a review of the relevant literature, a web-based survey of a cross section of transit agencies in North America, and telephone interviews conducted with key personnel at six transit agencies to profile innovative and successful practices and to explore ongoing issues. Surveys were received from 56 transit agencies; a response rate of 73%. Additionally, 45 agencies responded to a broad-based invitation to par- ticipate in the survey, for a total of 86 agencies. These 86 agencies range in size from having 10 to more than 2,000 buses in operation. Daniel Boyle, Dan Boyle and Associates, San Diego, California, collected and synthe- sized the information and wrote the paper, under the guidance of a panel of experts in the subject area. The members of the Topic Panel are acknowledged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand. FOREWORD PREFACE By Donna Vlasak Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board

conTenTs 7 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Project Background and Objectives, 7 Technical Approach, 7 Organization of the Report, 8 9 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction, 9 Previous Synthesis, 9 General Overview of Automatic Passenger Counters, 9 How Automatic Passenger Counter Data Are Used, 9 Automatic Passenger Counting Data and Modeling, 10 Data Processing, 10 Data Integration, 10 Implementation of Automatic Passenger Counting Systems, 10 Related Technologies, 11 Summary, 11 12 CHAPTER THREE RIDERSHIP AND TRAVEL TIME DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Introduction, 12 Why Collect Ridership and Travel Time Data, 12 Means of Collecting Ridership Data, 13 Use of Automatic Passenger Counters at Transit Agencies, 14 Automatic Passenger Counting Data: Processing, Validating, and Reporting, 15 Organization and Resource Requirements, 18 Summary, 20 23 CHAPTER FOUR AGENCY ASSESSMENT OF AUTOMATIC PASSENGER COUNTER SYSTEMS Introduction, 23 Satisfaction with Automatic Passenger Counter System, 23 Lessons Learned from Survey Responses, 24 Summary, 26 27 CHAPTER FIVE CASE STUDIES Introduction, 27 OC Transpo (Ottawa–Carleton Regional Transit Commission)—Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 27 RTD (Regional Transportation District)—Denver, Colorado, 29 NFTA (Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority)—Buffalo, New York, 31 RTC (Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County)—Reno, Nevada, 33 Metro Transit—Madison, Wisconsin, 34 TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District)—Portland, Oregon, 35 38 CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE STUDY Introduction, 38 Automatic Passenger Counter Implementation, 38 Automatic Passenger Counter Data: Processing, Validating, and Reporting, 38 Agency Assessments of Automatic Passenger Counting Systems, 39 Lessons Learned, 39 Conclusions and Areas of Future Study, 40

42 REFERENCES 44 ACRONYMS 45 APPENDIX A TCRP SYNTHESIS SURVEY: PASSENGER COUNTING TECHNOLOGIES 57 APPENDIX B TCRP SYNTHESIS SURVEY RESULTS 69 APPENDIX C LIST OF PARTICIPATING TRANSIT AGENCIES 71 APPENDIX D AGENCIES AND AUTOMATIC PASSENGER COUNTER MANUFACTURERS

Next: Summary »
Passenger Counting Systems Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Synthesis 77: Passenger Counting Systems explores analytical tools and technologies for collecting transit ridership and other subsidiary data. The report also examines issues of potential concern to transit agencies considering automatic passenger counter systems.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!