Click for next page ( 18


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 17
17 Table 15. Turning point by functional area and environmental factor. Function Area-per-Passenger TP Passenger Wait-Time TP Curbside Check-in agent More than 20 min Kiosk More than 20 min Bag drop SSCP More than a value of between 10 to 30 min* APM Corridor Holdroom Bag claim More than 20 min *Lack of sufficient data in this range prevents a more definitive value for the TP. First presented are the detailed results for the four functional Figure 1 shows the spread of perception data, and Figure 2 areas (staffed agent check-in, kiosk, SSCP, and bag claim) shows the distribution of average perception ratings for the where it was possible to discern legitimate turning points in agent check-in process collected at all airports compared to the data for passenger wait times where the average perception waiting time. Each X represents at least one data point. values rose above acceptable (3.0). The remaining functional For Figure 2, the size of the bubble shows the relative num- areas (where no legitimate turning points could be developed) ber of data points that make up the average for that bucket are shown in Appendix B. compared to other buckets. Table 17 shows the results for the test conditions for this Detailed Passenger Wait-Time Results functional area based on waiting time. Statistical analysis shows the relationship between time in queue and average Figures 1 through 8 show the graphical spread of the data perception rating to be significant for each test condition collected for all airports for wait times, both in terms of the (1 through 5) for waiting time. This indicates a progressive raw data and averages of 5-min time buckets (e.g., 05 min, relationship between time spent waiting and average per- >510 min). Five-minute periods were chosen as the level of ception rating. If we determine the point at which average resolution because smaller periods did not contain enough perception passes the acceptable ranking (3), we obtain the data points across the board to conduct relevant statistical turning point. For these data, the TP occurs around a wait tests. Larger periods would not provide as much resolution. time of 16 to 20 min. The data show the relationship between perception score and the time spent in queue or process for a given functional area for the four areas that exhibited a clear trend. Kiosks Table 18 shows the average perception rating depending Check-In on the number of minutes each passenger spent waiting at the kiosk. Table 16 shows the average perception rating depending Figure 3 shows the spread of perception data, and Figure 4 on how long the passengers spent in the queue. shows the distribution of average perception ratings for the kiosk process collected at all airports compared to waiting time. Each X represents at least one data point. Table 16. Average passenger For Figure 4, the size of the bubble shows the relative num- perception of ticketing queue ber of data points that make up the average for that bucket time versus length of wait. compared to the other buckets. Length of Wait Average Perception Table 19 shows the results for the test conditions for this 05 min 1.8 functional area based on waiting time. Statistical analysis shows >510 min 2.2 the relationship between time in queue and average percep- >1015 min 2.6 >1520 min 3.2 tion rating to be significant for the first four test conditions >2025 min 3.7 (1 through 4) for waiting time. This indicates a progressive >2530 min 3.2 relationship between the time spent waiting and average per- >3035 min 4.0 ception rating. If we determine the point at which average

OCR for page 17
18 Figure 1. Perception ratings for staffed agent check-in process by time spent in queue. Figure 2. Average perception ratings for staffed agent check-in process by time spent in queue. Table 17. Results for test conditions for staffed agent check-in Table 18. Average passenger based on waiting time. perception of kiosk process time versus length of wait. Test Condition Data Group A Data Group B p-value Significant Difference for Wait Time Length of Wait Average Perception Condition 1 Wait Time 5 min Wait Time > 5 min 0.00 Yes 05 min 2.0 Condition 2 Wait Time 10 min Wait Time > 10 min 0.00 Yes >510 min 2.4 Condition 3 Wait Time 15 min Wait Time > 15 min 0.00 Yes >1015 min 2.6 Condition 4 Wait Time 20 min Wait Time > 20 min 0.00 Yes >1520 min 2.7 Condition 5 Wait Time 30 min Wait Time > 30 min 0.00 Yes >2025 min 3.2

OCR for page 17
19 Figure 3. Perception ratings for kiosk process by time spent in queue. Figure 4. Average perception ratings for kiosk process by time spent in queue. Table 19. Results for test conditions for kiosk based on waiting time. Test Condition Data Group A Data Group B p-value Significant Difference for Wait Time Condition 1 Wait time 5 min Wait time > 5 min 0.00 Yes Condition 2 Wait time 10 min Wait time > 10 min 0.00 Yes Condition 3 Wait time 15 min Wait time > 15 min .006 Yes Condition 4 Wait time 20 min Wait time > 20 min .030 Yes Condition 5 Wait time 30 min Wait time > 30 min .656 No

OCR for page 17
20 Table 20. Average passenger Table 21 shows the results for the test conditions for this perception of security queue functional area based on waiting time. Statistical analysis shows time versus length of wait. the relationship between time in queue and average perception rating to be significant for each test condition (1 through 5) for Length of Wait Average Perception 05 min 1.8 waiting time. This indicates a progressive relationship between >510 min 2.4 time spent waiting and average perception rating. If we deter- >1015 min 2.6 mine the point at which average perception exceeds the accept- able ranking (3), we obtain the TP. For these data, the TP likely occurs around a wait time of above 10 min. perception passes the acceptable ranking (3), we obtain the TP. For these data, the TP occurs within a wait time of 21 Bag Claim to 25 min. Table 22 shows the average perception rating depending on how long the passengers spent in the bag claim process. Security Screening Checkpoint Figure 7 shows the spread of perception data, and Figure 8 Table 20 shows the average perception rating depending shows the distribution of average perception ratings for the on how long the passengers were in the checkpoint queue. bag claim process collected at all airports compared to wait- Figure 5 shows the spread of perception data, and Figure 6 ing time. Each X represents at least one data point. shows the distribution of average perception ratings for the For Figure 8, the size of the bubble shows the relative num- SSCP process collected at all airports compared to waiting ber of data points that make up the average for that bucket time. Each X represents at least one data point. compared to the other buckets. For Figure 6, the size of the bubble shows the relative num- Table 23 shows the results for the test conditions for this ber of data points that make up the average for that bucket functional area based on waiting time. Statistical analysis shows compared to the other buckets. There was a noticeable lack of the relationship between time in queue and average perception data past the 10- to 12-minute mark--an indication that such rating to be significant for all five test conditions (1 through 5) conditions occur infrequently in practice, given the TSA's for waiting time. This indicates a progressive relationship focus on providing shorter wait times for passengers during between time spent waiting and average perception rating. If the study time frame. we determine the point at which average perception passes Figure 5. Perception ratings for SSCP process by time spent in queue.

OCR for page 17
Figure 6. Average perception ratings for SSCP process by time spent in queue. Table 21. Results for test conditions for SSCP based on Table 22. Average passenger waiting time. perception of bag claim process time versus length Test Condition Data Group A Data Group B p-value Significant Difference of wait. for Wait Time Condition 1 Wait time 5 min Wait time > 5 min 0.00 Yes Length of Wait Average Perception Condition 2 Wait time 10 min Wait time > 10 min 0.00 Yes 05 min 1.6 Condition 3 Wait time 15 min Wait time > 15 min 0.00 Yes >510 min 1.8 Condition 4 Wait time 20 min Wait time > 20 min 0.00 Yes >1015 min 2.3 Condition 5 Wait time 30 min Wait time > 30 min 0.00 Yes >1520 min 2.9 >2025 min 2.9 >2530 min 2.9 >3035 min 4.0 Figure 7. Perception ratings for bag claim process by time spent in queue.