Annals of Library and Information Studies

Vol. 69, December 2022, pp. 269-276

DOI: 10.56042/alis.v69i4.64348

LibQUAL+® based importance-performance matrix analysis for assessing library

service quality: A case study
Giridhar Kamatha, Jyothi Mallyab, Vasanth Kamathc, and Valsaraj Payinid
a
Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities and Management, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher
Education, Manipal, 576104, India. Email: [email protected]
b
Librarian, Welcomgroup Graduate School of Hotel Administration, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India, 576104,
India. Email: [email protected]
c
Associate Professor, Operations and Decision Sciences, T A Pai Management Institute, Manipal Academy of Higher Education,
Manipal, 576104, India. Email: [email protected]
d
Corresponding author Associate Professor, Welcomgroup Graduate School of Hotel Administration,
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India, 576104, India. Email: [email protected]

Received: 08 July 2022; revised: 11 October 2022; accepted: 15 November 2022

The main purpose of this study was to measure the strengths and weaknesses of library services using Importance-
Performance Matrix Analysis (IPMA). It also intends to identify the critical areas of the library within the three dimensions
of LibQUAL+® based on student feedback. Data were collected from students at a private engineering institute in India,
using a structured questionnaire to achieve these objectives. Respondents rated the importance and performance of library
services on the three dimensions of LibQUAL+®: affect of service (AOS), information control (IC), and library as a place
(LP) on a 7-point Likert scale. Analysis was carried out using IPMA to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the library
services. The findings suggest that LP was the most essential and well-performing dimension in the library context. IC is the
most important, but poorly performing dimension. Therefore, strategies are recommended to ensure the effectiveness of the
service. The findings of this study would help library administrators, and policymakers formulate appropriate fund
allocation/reallocation based on user requirements. The integration of IPMA and LibQUAL+® in measuring library service
quality is a significant contribution of this study to LibQUAL+® literature.

Keywords: LibQUAL+®, importance-performance analysis, service quality, library services

Introduction method has received criticism from researchers7, who

Over the last two decades, academicians and argued that a novice user of the service would make
library practitioners have recognised the need to an unrealistic assessment of expectations and ratings.
assess library services to meet user demands1, fulfil Further, Carman et al.8 warned that there might be
users' teaching and learning needs, and support possibilities of manipulating expectations if the
institutions' educational goals. Additionally, advances quality is measured after availing of the services.
in ICT have enabled libraries to deliver electronic, To address these drawbacks, this study integrates the
web-based, and physical services. Therefore, it is LibQUAL+® model with the Importance-Performance
necessary to measure the accessibility of information Matrix (IPM) to evaluate the quality of library services
and online services2 along with the tangible entity of based on student feedback. The IPM approach is used to
the library. Previous studies have applied two identify the strengths and weaknesses of services based
well-known measurement tools to assess library on consumer feedback. This matrix suggests that
services: SERVQUAL3, 4 and LibQUAL+®5,6. These consumer satisfaction is driven by two major factors:
tools are based on the Expectation Confirmation importance and performance. While "importance" is a
and Disconfirmation theory, according to which term relative to the consumers, "performance" measures
consumers develop a certain level of expectation the level of implementation of the service variable(s)
before they avail of a service. They rate its quality on against expectations. Both factors must be studied
three levels: minimum, expected and perceived post- collectively to measure consumer satisfaction9. The
service. The differences between the three levels were study's outcome can support library service providers in
calculated by subtracting the scores. However, this improving and prioritizing service attributes based on
270 ANN. LIB
B. INF. STU.; DECEMBER
D 20022

user percepptions. Furtheer, Roszkowsski10 ascertainned that aassigning a high priorrity to the attributes that
perceived rating
r of serrvice is bettter than supperiority consumers are a unsatisfieed with buut are otherrwise
scores to measure
m satisfaaction becausse consumerss can be pperceived as important. T This techniqu ue helps idenntify
satisfied evven when thheir expectattion levels are a not critical areass of produccts or servicces that reqquire
fulfilled11. Therefore, thhis study adoopts only peerceived immprovementt. It identifiees consumerr satisfactionn as
performancce, along with w IPM, to measurre the thhe utility of o two deteerminants: importance and
performancce of library services.
s pperformance17. While performance
p represents the
uuser’s percepption of the qquality of seervices deliveered,
Review of literature immportance reefers to the aassessment of o the importtance
LibQUAL L+® oof those serviices by the ussers18.
Since its inceptioon in 20000, LibQUA AL+®, As seen inn Fig. 1, quaadrant I (high h importancee/low
developed based on SE ERVQUAL122 has evolvedd into a pperformance) is "Concenntrate here,” which inclludes
powerful tool
t for librrary professiionals to measure,
m aattributes thatt require immmediate attenttion or correcctive
track, and d understandd the requirrements of library aaction by thhe service pprovider. Quuadrant II (high (
users. Likee SERVQUA AL, LibQUA AL+® also seeeks to immportance/hiigh performaance) is ''keeep up the good g
measure seervice adequuacy based on o users’ ressponses wwork'' and represents
r thhe strength of the serrvice
to a miniimum, desirred, and perceived p leevel of oorganization. Service prroviders mu ust maintain the
service quaality. A posittive adequaccy gap suggests that qquality of thhe service atttributes. Th he characteriistics
perceived service quallity is higherr than expecctations mmentioned in i quadrant III (low importancee/low
and vice veersa. The gaap score indiicates the ad dequacy pperformance) are calleed ''Low priority''. p These
T
or shortfall of service levels for all a dimensioons and aattributes do not
n threaten the organizaation, and serrvice
their subdiimensions. T The LibQUA AL+® tool consists
c pproviders cann focus more on those that t need urrgent
of three maain dimensioons and 22 subdimension
s ns. The aaction. Quadraant IV (low iimportance/h high performaance)
three dim mensions aree Affect off Service (AOS), ( iss called ''Posssible overkilll'' and includ
des attributess that
Informationn Control (IC C), and Libraary as a placee (LP). hhave no impaact on total cuustomer satisfaction, impllying
The firrst dimension, AOS, comprisess nine thhat service providers
p cann reallocate thhem. This matrix
m
subdimensiions and meeasures the interaction between hhas been suuccessfully used to measure m diffe
ferent
library serrvice providders and users. u The second ddimensions off education19, 20
dimension,, IC, has eighht sub-dimennsions and co oncerns
the availabbility of eduucational ressources and access NNeed for the Integration n of IPM witth LibQUAL L+®
provided to t users to use the ressources. Thee third mmodel
dimension,, LP, measures the tanggible aspects of the Theoreticallly, LibQU UAL+® i
is based on
library, succh as its preemises, facillities, and physical ddisconfirmatioon rather thann on an attitu
udinal paraddigm.
atmospheree, through fivve subdimennsions.
Howeveer, despite its provenn reliabilityy and
validity13, 14, this tooll has been challenged in the
past15. Thee most cruciaal critique iss understanding the
three diffeerent levels of service. Researcherss opine
that users find
f it difficuult to differeentiate betweeen the
three levelss, resulting inn poor or inccorrect assesssments
of servicess16. Edgar sttated that addministratorss could
adapt to other
o methoodologies, suuch as interrviews,
observationn, content anaalysis, along with LibQU UAL+®,
to determine the effecctiveness off library servvices15.
Thus, thee present study integgrated IPM M with
LibQUAL+ +® to meaasure the quality q of library
services.
Importancce-Performaance Matrixx Analysis (IPMA)
The IPM MA methodoology allowss service prooviders
to prioritize the charactteristics of service attribuutes by Fig. 1 — IPMA Grid ((Martilla and Jaames, 1977)
 KAMATH et al.: LIBQUAL+® BASED IMPORTANCE-PERFORMANCE MATRIX ANALYSIS FOR ASSESSING
LIBRARY SERVICE QUALITY
271

Thus, it fails to draw on established economic,  To understand the difference between male and
statistical, and psychological theories21. While taking female students' perceptions regarding library
a different approach to the expectation measure, services' importance and performance indicators;
Iacobucci opined those expectations might not exist; and
instead, they may be formed simultaneously during  To investigate the overall strengths and weaknesses
service consumption22. Similarly, consumers might of library services.
form "experience-based norms" after service consumption
rather than prior expectations23. Another criticism Methods
of the gap model is that it fails to capture the This study was conducted at a leading private
dynamics of the changing expectations. Library users' engineering institute in India. The institute provides
expectations from their initial encounters with the undergraduate, postgraduate, and doctoral engineering,
library have changed over time. Moreover, expectations basic sciences, and management programmes. The
are likely to be influenced by other factors such as institute has a legacy of over three decades and
users' prior experience, personal needs, and word-of- has been consistently ranked among the top 50
mouth information from peers or friends. engineering institutes in the country. It houses a
Further, operationally, the term expectation is multi-story, state-of-the-art library facility with the
polysemic; thus, it is difficult to measure the absolute latest collection of books, research journals,
expectations of service quality. It is also found that the databases, theses, and dissertations in both online and
administration of two instruments (expectation and print formats. The library caters to the needs of over
perception) causes boredom and confusion24. 5000 young minds from all over the country and
Additionally, Carman8 observed that it is not practical offers one of the best library service facilities in the
to expect respondents to complete an inventory of nation.
expectations before a service encounter and an
inventory of perceptions immediately afterwards. Research design and respondents' profile
Furthermore, some researchers from the library service To achieve these objectives, this study used a
quality discipline found that respondents did not fully modified performance-only version of LibQUAL+®
understand the three service levels: minimum, desired, with 22 items under three dimensions: AOS (nine
and perceived, as asked in the survey16 and that their items), IC (eight items), and LP (five items). It also
gap scores are not constant since respondents' used a purposive sampling technique. Considering the
expectations change with experience10. level of maturity and exposure to different library
Voorbij25 also showed that LibQUAL+® is not services, only senior students from all disciplines of
user-friendly, and the libraries that used it in their engineering studies were included in the study. The
survey found that the respondents could not complete survey was distributed in classrooms and libraries.
it. Thus, performance-based measures are recommended The participants were briefed about the purpose
to reflect long-term service quality attitudes more of the survey and asked to rate the importance and
accurately26. Therefore, it is logical to use IPM and performance of the different service attributes on a
the LibQUAL+® model to evaluate library service 7-point Likert scale, with 1 representing low and
quality. The integration of IPM is deemed fit because 7 representing high. A total of 515 questionnaires
of its successful adaptation by service quality were distributed. After removing incomplete survey
researchers in the past. For example, it was integrated questionnaires, 495 responses were used for the
with SERVQUAL27, 28, webQUAL 4.029, and final analysis. Of the 495 students, 393 (79.39 %)
servicescape30. Therefore, the current study integrates were undergraduates and 102 (20.61 %) were
IPM with LibQUAL+® items and measures the postgraduates. The sample consisted of 298 male
perception of library users on the importance and (60.21 %) and 197 female students (39.79 %).
performance of library service attributes rather than
on the expectation-confirmation basis. Steps in the IPMA
The following methodology summarises the
Objectives of the study sequence for developing an IPM.
 To find out the importance and performance of Step 1: Calculate the mean of the perceived importance
library service indicators; scores for the individual item in the questionnaire.
272 ANN. LIB. INF. STU.; DECEMBER 2022

Q Step 4: Calculate the median of the ∅ and θ

∅ values and draw the grid lines to divide the scatter
n plot into quadrants.
Where, In other words, the importance measures of attributes
are represented on the vertical axis, whereas the
∅ = Mean of the corresponding item amongst the performance measures are represented on the horizontal
perceived importance score axis of a two-dimensional graph. Furthermore, this two-
Q = Likert score of the "i" th participant in dimensional graph is divided into four quadrants based
corresponding perceived importance item on the median scores of importance and performance,
n= Number of participants in the survey with the quality characteristics classified into four
Step 2: Calculate the mean performance score for quadrants.
each item in the questionnaire.
Results and Discussion
Q
θ Construct reliability and Validity
n First, Cronbach's alpha was calculated to measure
the reliability of each construct adopted in the
Where, study. The reliability tests suggest that all three
θ = Mean of the corresponding item amongst the dimensions of LibQUAL+® are reliable, as
present performance scores Cronbach's alpha is above 0.7, as recommended.
Q = Likert score of the "i" th participant in the Second, convergent and discriminant validity tests
corresponding present performance item were conducted. The results suggest that the
n= Number of participants in the survey measurement model has both convergent and
Step 3: For every corresponding item in the discriminant validities. The square root of the AVE
questionnaire, plot the ∅ and θ scores in a scatter for each construct was greater than the correlation
plot. between constructs (Tables 1 & 2).
Table 1 — Constructs reliability of measurement model
Indicators Item code Factor Loadings Cronbach's alpha CR AVE
AOS Instil confidence in users ASP1 0.503 0.903 0.906 0.521
Giving users individual attention ASP2 0.693
Consistently courteous ASP3 0.819
Readiness to respond to users' questions ASP4 0.786
Knowledge to answer users' questions ASP5 0.602
Deal with users in a caring fashion ASP6 0.854
Understand the needs of their users ASP7 0.655
Willingness to help users ASP8 0.744
Handling users' service problems ASP9 0.772
IC Making electronic resources accessible IC1 0.604 0.891 0.891 0.508
Library web site to locate information on my own IC2 0.699
The printed library materials I need for my work IC3 0.734
The electronic information resources I need IC4 0.795
Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed IC5 0.831
information
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on IC6 0.716
my own
Making information easily accessible for independent use IC7 0.726
Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my IC8 0.559
work
LP Library space that inspires study and learning LP1 0.660 0.825 0.814 0.524
Quiet space for individual activities LP2 0.776
A comfortable and inviting location LP3 0.760
The library is a gateway for study, learning or research LP4 0.693
Community space for group learning and group LP5 0.623
 KAMATH et al.: LIBQUAL+® BASED IMPORTANCE-PERFORMANCE MATRIX ANALYSIS FOR ASSESSING
LIBRARY SERVICE QUALITY
273

After achieving the construct reliability and However, as shown in Fig. 2, the performance of
validity, the means and standard deviations were this dimension is based on user expectations. LP
calculated (Table 3) to achieve the study's first emerged as a more robust dimension of the
objective. Based on the mean scores of indicators, the library, implying that library administrators
top five most important variables were as follows: successfully fulfilled the user expectations of this
• Quiet space for individual activities (LP2) dimension.
• A comfortable and inviting location (LP3)
• Library is a gateway for study, learning or research IPA for Gender Difference
(LP4) Regarding the second objective, the IPMA between
• Willingness to help users (ASP8) the male and female engineering students is presented
• Library space that inspires study and learning (LP1) in Table 4. Overall, the results show that male and
It is interesting to observe that the students rated female students have similar importance and
four of the five variables of the LP as important. performance for the LibQUAL+® attributes. For
Table 2 — Average variance extracted (AVE) matrix
example, the attributes of LP fell into Q2 (keep up
with good work). Similarly, most ASP attributes are
ASP IC LP
in Q3 (lower priority). However, the IC attributes
ASP 0.722
were in Q1 (concentrate here) for male students. In
IC 0.0519 0.713
LP 0.0251 0.378 0.724
contrast, females rated ASP attributes as the most
Note: Diagonal elements AVE for each factor. Off-diagonal are important, suggesting that male and female students
the squared correlations among factors. are rated differently.

Table 3 — Individual item details for the importance and performance mean scores
Item code Importance α Performance α
Mean SD Mean SD
ASP1 5.36 1.40 0.85 4.68 1.50 0.91
ASP2 5.34 1.31 4.55 1.54
ASP3 5.81 1.05 4.94 1.56
ASP4 6.07 1.03 5.25 1.41
ASP5 6.13 0.96 5.23 1.25
ASP6 6.01 0.98 4.99 1.51
ASP7 6.16 0.95 5.12 1.39
ASP8 6.21 1.03 5.22 1.49
ASP9 5.99 1.00 4.91 1.42
IC1 6.11 1.12 0.91 4.85 1.56 0.79
IC2 6.16 1.01 4.96 1.61
IC3 6.04 1.11 4.84 1.38
IC4 6.03 1.12 4.89 1.39
IC5 6.09 1.13 4.79 1.46
IC6 6.07 1.11 4.92 1.45
IC7 6.05 1.11 5.02 1.40
IC8 5.98 1.18 5.24 3.87
LP1 6.18 1.29 0.90 5.32 1.60 0.88
LP2 6.34 1.15 5.28 1.64
LP3 6.25 1.13 5.38 1.52
LP4 6.25 1.02 5.33 1.44
LP5 6.15 1.19 5.63 1.47

Table 4 — IPMA results based on Gender

Quartile Description Male Female
Q1 Concentrate here IC1, IC2, IC5, ASP7 ASP8, ASP9, ASP5, ASP5, IC5
Q2 Keep up the good work ASP5, ASP8, LP1, LP2, LP3, LP4, IC6 ASP7, IC 7, LP1, LP2, LP3, LP4, LP5, IC2
Q3 Low priority IC3, IC4, ASP9, ASP6, ASP3, ASP2, ASP1 ASP1, ASP2, ASP3, ASP6, IC6, IC8
Q4 Possible to overkill LP5, IC7, IC8, ASP4 IC1, IC3, IC4
274 ANN. LIB
B. INF. STU.; DECEMBER
D 20022

F
Fig. 3 — IPA for the global average, accorrding to the median
m
value for the axiis.

reesources to reduce the effort of ussers in obtaiining

reelevant information, theereby improving the libbrary
service experrience (Fig. 33).
Quadrant II 'Keep up u the goood work' (high (
Immportance/hhigh Perform mance). This quadrant impplies
thhat administrrators can maintain
m the status
s quo, ass the
vvariables herre are the liibrary's strenngths. Attribbutes
aassociated with
w LP werre rated higgh in perceeived
immportance and presennt performaance by users, u
suuggesting thhat they founnd the libraryy space inspirring,
comfortable, and ideal for study,, learning, and
reesearch. Thee other variabbles in this quadrant
q are from
f
thhe first dim
mension, thaat is, AOS: Understandd the
nneeds of theirr users (ASPP7), willingn ness to help users
u
(AASP8), know wledge to annswer user qu uestions (ASSP5),
aand readinesss to respond tto users' questions (ASP4 4). It
Fig. 2 — IPA
I matrix comparison
c f a) males and b)
for
can be conclu uded that the users were satisfied
s withh the
females
services provvided by tthe library staff and their
Overall Immportance-P Performancee Analysis kknowledge annd ability to answer the queries.
q
Finally, to achieve tthe third objeective of thee study, Quadrant III: 'Low prriority (low importancee/low
IPA is used to identifyy the variablles that account for pperformance)). The variabbles in this quadrant doo not
the strengthhs and weaknnesses of librrary servicess. reequire muchh attention. The resources allocated to
Quadrannt I 'Concenntrate Here' (high Impoortance/ n quadrant I. The
thhese areas caan be diverteed to areas in
low Perforrmance): This is a cruciial area thatt needs loow-priority variables, aas rated by the users, instil
i
improvemeent based on user ratinngs. This quuadrant confidence inn users (ASP P1), Giving users indiviidual
includes many
m variablles such as making eleectronic aattention (AS
SP2), Consisttently courteo ous (ASP3), deal
resources accessible
a (IC
C1), a librarry website too locate wwith users in a caring fashhion (ASP6)), handling users'
u
informationn on my ownn (IC2), mod dern equipmeent that service probleems (ASP9),, the printed library mateerials
allows me to easily aaccess the information I need I need for myy work (IC33), the electro onic informaation
(IC5), and easy-to-use access tools that allow w me to reesources I need
n (IC4) aand Easy-to--use access tools
t
find thingss on my ow wn (IC6). Innterestingly, all the thhat allow mee to find thinggs on my ow wn (IC6).
items in thhis quadrantt belong to the IC dimeension, Quadrant IV:
I 'Possiblee overkill' (llow Importaance/
suggesting that the librrary needs to develop eleectronic hhigh Performmance). The vvariables in this
t quadrannt are
 KAMATH et al.: LIBQUAL+® BASED IMPORTANCE-PERFORMANCE MATRIX ANALYSIS FOR ASSESSING
LIBRARY SERVICE QUALITY
275

overly highlighted by the library but rated as low students were satisfied with the library space and
importance by the users. The variable print and assistance provided by the library staff. For future
electronic journal collections I require for my work research, it is recommended that library professionals
(IC8) fall into this quadrant. One plausible reason for integrate the importance-performance matrix and
this could be the sample characteristics of the LibQUAL+® survey instrument to understand their
study. The respondents were UG and PG engineering users’ perspectives better. This will also identify critical
students, and they found that the library paid more factors in structural modelling and simulations for policy
attention than required to build a print and online development.
journal collection. Library administrators should give
References
them thoughts before making any changes to their 1 Nyakweba I. Bukirwa, J M Sendikadiwa E and Ratanya F C,
journal collections. A similar survey may also be Users’ needs and expectations on information services
conducted among faculty members before considering provided in libraries: case of four public university libraries
any changes in the library's journal collection because from the western region of Kenya, Library Management, 43
it has been found that this variable was rated as (1-2) (2022) 1–14.
2 Nitecki D A, Changing the concept and measure of service
important among faculty members in Texas A & M. quality in academic libraries, Journal of Academic
Meanwhile, there were a few concerns regarding Librarianship, 22 (3) (1996) 181–190.
the library’s IC dimensions. Students were dissatisfied 3 Sajna K P and Mohamed Haneefa K, Service quality of
with the library websites and the electronic resources special libraries in Kerala, India, DESIDOC Journal of
Library and Information Technology, 41 (2) (2021) 75–81.
provided. Therefore, administrators should act 4 Hossain M J Islam M A and Saadi M S, Evaluating users'
appropriately to improve website and library service experience of service performance using SERVPERF
quality and procure more eBooks and other electronic scale: A case study of some private university libraries in
resources based on students' requirements. This Bangladesh, Annals of Library and Information Studies, 60
library website often serves as a workstation for (4) (2014) 249–259.
5 Hasugian J and Lubis D, Library service quality and student
library users and staff. Hence, effective presentation, trust a case study of the University of Sumatera Utara
content organization, and website access speed up Library, Indonesia, DESIDOC Journal of Library and
librarians’ work and save users' time. Proper listing of Information Technology, 41 (5) (2021) 345–351.
information enables users to locate physical and 6 Ghaedi R, Valizadeh-Haghi S, Ahmadi E, Zeraatkar Z and
Baghestani AR. Gaps between users expectations and their
electronic sources within the library. Library perceptions on service quality of college libraries of Shahid
administrators can use the website to keep their users Beheshti University of Medical Sciences: a case study,
well informed of the latest engineering and allied DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology,
disciplines developments. Thus, the study recommends 40 (5) (2020) 131–136.
that libraries and network administration should 7 Westbrook R A and Newman J W, An analysis of shopper
dissatisfaction for major household appliances, Journal of
improve the accessibility of library resources Marketing Research, 15 (8) (1978) 456–467.
and websites. The proposed recommendations are 8 Carman J M, Consumer perceptions of service quality: an
inexpensive and straightforward to implement. assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions, Journal of
They have potential benefits for both users and Retailing, 6 (1) (1990) 33.
9 Mallya J and Patwardhan V, Hospitality students’ perception
administrators in improving the service quality levels. of college library service quality: Importance-performance
Conclusion analysis, DESIDOC Journal of library and Information
Technology, 38 (2) (2018) 125–131.
This study aims to demonstrate how IPMA can 10 Roszkowski M J, Baky J S and Jones D B, So which score on
measure the strengths and weaknesses of the library the LibQual+TM tells me if library users are satisfied?,
service in a leading private engineering institute in Library and Information Science Research, 27 (4) (2005)
Karnataka, India. Data were collected from the UG and 424–439.
11 Hughes K, Tourist Satisfaction: A Guided “Cultural” Tour in
PG students using the LibQUAL+® survey instrument North Queensland, Australian Psychologist, 26, 166–171
and analysed using the IPM to identify areas for (1991).
improvement. These findings are helpful for both 12 Parasuraman A, Zeithaml V A and Berry L L, SERQUAL: A
librarians and policymakers in educational institutions. multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of
Study findings showed that the library administrators service quality, Journal of Retailing, 64 (1) (1988) 28.
13 Ladhari R and Morales M, Perceived service quality,
successfully provide conducive service to their students. perceived value and recommendation A study among
Notably, LP emerged as the most crucial variable Canadian public library users, Library Management, 29 (4-5)
and a well-performed dimension of LibQUAL+®. The (2008) 352–366.
276 ANN. LIB. INF. STU.; DECEMBER 2022

14 Choshaly S H and Mirabolghasemi M, Using SEM-PLS to 23 Kahneman D and Miller DT, Norm theory: Comparing
assess users satisfaction of library service quality: evidence reality to its alternatives, Psychological Review, 93 (2)
from Malaysia, Library Management, 40 (3-4) (2019) (1986) 136–153.
240–250. 24 Bouman M and Van der Wiele T, Measuring service quality
15 Edgar B, Questioning LibQUAL+: critiquing its assessment in the car service industry: building and testing an
of academic library effectiveness, Proceedings of the instrument, International Journal of Service Industry
American Society for Information, 43 (1) (2007) 1–17. Management, 3 (4) (1992) 4–16.
16 Thompson B Cook C and Heath F, The LibQUAL+gap 25 Voorbij H, The use of LibQUAL+ by European research
measurement model: the bad, the ugly, and the good of gap libraries, Performance Measurement and Metrics, 13 (3)
measurement, Performance Measurement and Metrics, 1 (3) (2012) 154–168.
(2000) 165–178 26 Cronin J J and Taylor S A, Measuring service quality: A Re-
17 Martilla J A and James J C, Importance-Performance examination and Extension, Journal of Marketing, 56 (3)
Analysis, Journal of Marketing, 41(1) (1977) 77. (1992) 55-68.
18 Jou R C and Day Y J, Application of revised importance– 27 Najiyah A N and Dachyar M, Service quality improvement
performance analysis to investigate critical service quality of strategy for container terminal using SERVQUAL and house
hotel online booking, Sustainability, 13 (2021) 2043. of quality, 11th Annual International Conference on
19 Thien L M. Leong M C and Por F P, Factors contributing Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, (2021)
to Gen Z’s deep learning: investigating undergraduates’ 1613–1621.
course experience in Malaysian private higher education 28 Verma K, Importance Performance Analysis and Servqual
institutions, Journal of Applied Research in Higher Model: an integrated approach for enhancing customer
Education, (2021) https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-01-2021- satisfaction, Review of Professional Management, 14 (1)
0005 (2016) 51–59.
20 Alburo H R, Feliscuzo L S and Cherry Lyn C L C, 29 Warjiyono W and Hellyana C, An analysis &measurement of
Visualizing students’ satisfaction and importance of website quality using the WebQual 4.0 and importance
academic services: Applications of c5.0 algorithm and performance analysis (IPA) method (A Case Study Of
importance-performance analysis method, Journal of Jagalempeni village Brebes). InProceedings of The 2nd
Advance Research and Dynamic Control Systems, 12 (1) International Conference On Advance And Scientific
(2020) 121–131. Innovation, ICASI 2019, 18 July, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
21 Buttle F, SERVQUAL: review, critique, research 2019 Nov 26.
agenda, European Journal of Marketing, 30 (1) (1996) 30 García-Fernández J, Fernández-Gavira J, Sánchez-Oliver AJ,
8–32. Gálvez-Ruíz P, Grimaldi-Puyana M, Cepeda-Carrión G.
22 Iacobucci D, Ostrom A and Grayson K, Distinguishing Importance-performance matrix analysis (IPMA) to evaluate
service quality and customer satisfaction: the voice of the servicescape fitness consumer by gender and age,
consumer, Journal Consumer Psychology, 4 (3) (1995) International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
277–303. Health, 17 (18) (2020) 6562.