## 3 Materials and Methods
### Results
#### 4.2.2 Results--Determining Relevant Criteria Using AHP Methodology  
In this segment of the survey (second set of questions), the AHP methodology was used, which uses the Saaty scale to assess the relative importance of defined elements. The scale allows decision-makers to compare elements in a hierarchy according to their relative importance. According to the Saaty scale, a comparison of the importance of individual parameters for the passenger check-in facility was made. The following elements were compared: lower price, more available space waiting in line, and a shorter time waiting in line (Figures 11-19). The first compared parameter (left side) is ranked as follows: 1--equal importance (purple); 3--weak importance (dark green); 5--essential importance (yellow); 7--very strong importance (red); and 9--absolute importance (dark blue); and the second compared parameter (right side) is ranked as follows: 1--equal importance (purple); 3--weak importance (light blue); 5--essential importance (pink); 7--very strong importance (light green); and 9--absolute importance (dark red). The data in Figure 11 show that users consider a lower price more important than having more available space in the queue (score: 7), as well as a lower price compared to a shorter waiting time in the queue (score: 3). Comparing having more available space in the queue to a shorter waiting time, the surveyed respondents mostly stated that it was more important for them to wait for less time (score: 7). Figure 11: Passenger check-in (quality of service). Figure 12 compares the possible ways of checking in for a flight, namely the traditional way of checking in for a flight (counters) versus the use of self-service kiosks. The data show that both ways (criteria) are equally important to users (score: 1--equally important). Figure 13 compares the importance of two parameters at the check-in facilities: the received quality of service and the check-in method, whether at a counter or kiosk. Comparing the above parameters, respondents indicated that the received quality of service (score: 5) is slightly more important to them than the check-in method. The following analysis refers to the comparison of the following elements within the security control facility (Figure 14): lower ticket price, more available space waiting in line, and a shorter time waiting in line. These parameters were selected to confirm the hypothesis that passengers using LCC services are willing to wait longer and have less space per passenger. When compared with the check-in facility, the data obtained show great similarity. Namely, in this segment too, users gave greater importance to lower ticket prices compared to having more available space waiting in line (score: 7). At the same time, they gave more importance to lower ticket prices compared to shorter time waiting in line (score: 7). Also, when comparing having more available space waiting in line to a shorter time waiting in line, users gave greater importance to the shorter time waiting in line (score: 7). Figure 12: Passenger check-in (check-in methods). A lower ticket price, having more available space waiting in line, and a shorter time waiting in line were selected to confirm the hypothesis that passengers using LCC services are willing to wait longer and have less space per passenger. The terminal facility of emigration/immigration control shows similarities with the previous airport terminal facilities. Most respondents gave a score of 7 in favor of a lower price compared to having more available space waiting in line, then also a score of 7 in favor of a lower price compared to a shorter time waiting in line, while a score of 7 was given in favor of a shorter time waiting in line compared to having more available space waiting in line (Figure 15). Figure 16 shows a comparison of the importance of the following two parameters: lower price and having more available space while the passenger is in the holdroom.