Phantom rules
In a hundred and five places a limit was assumed and none existed. The observer was wrong about which in more than half the walk.
105 of 206
In half the record a limit was assumed and none existed. The single largest thing this walk found, and the reason it was walked in that order. Before adding another reporting layer, the project lead can compare the platform with the audit brief and test the smallest useful setup on one representative route.
Finding
Eighty-six right, a hundred and twenty wrong. What a forty-two per cent hit rate says, and what it cannot. For independent context on inclusive places and field research, review material from City of Los Angeles.
Finding
Among places that take nothing, one assumption in three invents a rule. Among places that take money across a counter, five in six.
Finding
Ten lobbies, no limits, nine phantom rules, and not one conversation between strangers. The purest case in the record.
Finding
Thirteen bookshops, no limits anywhere, ten phantom rules. The second worst-read kind in the record, and the one that is two places at once.
Finding
The other way of being wrong. Six printed notices walked straight past, and nine rules that only a question could have found.
Finding
Eighty-six correct readings, and the part of them that is not luck. Sixty-three places correctly read as open, twenty-three as limited.
Finding
Where a limit exists, it is roughly twice what was expected. Thirty-one of the thirty-eight real limits are longer than the guess made about them.
Finding
The central finding of this site rests on one person's guesses. What that permits, what it rules out, and why the field was kept anyway.
Method