Psychology of Indoor Environmental Quality
Brent Altemose
AltIH LLC, United States of America
Occupant perception of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) includes a psychological component. Those responsible for maintaining IEQ or investigating IEQ complaints can be more effective through a better understanding of human psychology.
The perceived acceptability of IEQ is strongly influenced by three key factors: (1) familiarity with the source of the concern; (2) the extent to which the indoor environment is within the occupant’s control; and (3) the perceived benefits or consequences of spending time in the indoor environment. Beliefs regarding acceptability of IEQ are also further reinforced by affirmation bias - the tendency to interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports the prior beliefs. Case studies for these factors and tendencies will be presented.
Occupants concerned about IEQ may be influenced by psychology, but those responsible for maintaining or assessing IEQ are also influenced by psychological factors. Their own affirmation bias may lead them to jump to conclusions on the suitability of IEQ. For instance, beliefs that occupants may be influenced more by psychological aspects than actual conditions may lead an assessor to be too quick to dismiss complaints. Those with education and knowledge in technical aspects of IEQ also are prone to the Dunning-Kruger effect, wherein they may be overconfident in their opinions or findings regarding good or poor IEQ. Several case studies about these effects will be presented.
Well-designed buildings and systematic and through approaches to IEQ assessments can help sort through the psychological aspects of IEQ problems. However, even with the best designs and most thorough assessments, how information about IEQ is communicated is critically important. The science of risk communication provides a foundation for effective communication regarding IEQ. Barriers to effective risk communication and proven techniques to overcome those barriers will be presented.
(Dis)comfort and Health-Induced Stress: the Need for Unravelling their Effects
Philomena M. Bluyssen
Delft University of technology, Netherlands, The
Research has shown that even though the indoor environmental conditions seem to comply with current standards and guidelines and those conditions seem ‘comfortable’ enough, staying indoors is not good for our health. Reasons for this discrepancy might be the fact that these guidelines are mainly based on single-dose response relationships (effect modelling using dose-related indicators) for the physical stressors (odour, light, sound, and temperature) determined for an average adult person; aimed at preventing short-term discomfort, not long-term health effects, ignoring situation-related aspects, ignoring different preferences and needs of occupants. In four steps, the question “What is needed to determine other indicators that can help to prevent long-term health effects?” is answered. In step 1, a more comprehensive research model than the single dose-response model is introduced. Step 2 is concerned with the validation of that model based on a series of field studies. Step 3 addresses the need for methods (and indicators) that enable us to study interactions ocurring at human level (perceptual and physiological) induced by indoor environmental stressors resulting in both short-term and long-term (integrated) effects. Finally, in step 4, it is emphasized that to determine indicators that can be used to predict long-term health effects from ‘short-term’ perceptual assessments and/or physiological measurement requires understanding of how aour body copes with stressors that trigger the (dis)comfort-induced mechanisms and the health-induced mechanisms.
Why Thermal Comfort Is Elusive – The Role of Socio-Cultural Factors
Marcel Harmon, Stuart Shell
BranchPattern, United States of America
Hot and cold complaints are among the most vexing building issues faced by building designers and users. While better adherence to existing standards would improve thermal comfort, socio-cultural factors are essential to unlocking gains for occupant satisfaction. Examples include cultural norms regarding clothing, building control interface design, and the implicit bias of building designers and operators. However, building designers and operators are ideally positioned to innovate how HVAC systems support occupants, thereby creating more comfortable, functional buildings.
Drawing from case studies and a cross-disciplinary review of the literature, this paper conceptualizes thermal comfort as a social construct that is heavily influenced by the interaction of socio-cultural and technological factors. From this viewpoint, the thermal comfort of a building is best understood as a measure of experience resulting from the ability to meet individual needs given contextual cultural norms, organizational policies, and building design. Ethnography is presented as a tool to understand and account for these factors.
The findings presented offer to advance thermal comfort in buildings by helping designers select more effective solutions, modelers better predict occupant satisfaction, building operators establish beneficial policies, and occupants claim greater agency over their surroundings. Significantly, incorporating behavioral science practices into the design and operation of buildings promises to increase equity amongst occupants.
|
