| 1. |
- Schweiker, Marcel, et al.
(author)
-
Evaluating assumptions of scales for subjective assessment of thermal environments – Do laypersons perceive them the way, we researchers believe?
- 2020
-
In: Energy and Buildings. - : Elsevier BV. - 0378-7788. ; 211
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- People's subjective response to any thermal environment is commonly investigated by using rating scales describing the degree of thermal sensation, comfort, and acceptability. Subsequent analyses of results collected in this way rely on the assumption that specific distances between verbal anchors placed on the scale exist and that relationships between verbal anchors from different dimensions that are assessed (e.g. thermal sensation and comfort) do not change. Another inherent assumption is that such scales are independent of the context in which they are used (climate zone, season, etc.). Despite their use worldwide, there is indication that contextual differences influence the way the scales are perceived and therefore question the reliability of the scales’ interpretation. To address this issue, a large international collaborative questionnaire study was conducted in 26 countries, using 21 different languages, which led to a dataset of 8225 questionnaires. Results, analysed by means of robust statistical techniques, revealed that only a subset of the responses are in accordance with the mentioned assumptions. Significant differences appeared between groups of participants in their perception of the scales, both in relation to distances of the anchors and relationships between scales. It was also found that respondents’ interpretations of scales changed with contextual factors, such as climate, season, and language. These findings highlight the need to carefully consider context-dependent factors in interpreting and reporting results from thermal comfort studies or post-occupancy evaluations, as well as to revisit the use of rating scales and the analysis methods used in thermal comfort studies to improve their reliability.
|
|
| 2. |
- Schweiker, Marcel, et al.
(author)
-
The Scales Project, a cross-national dataset on the interpretation of thermal perception scales
- 2019
-
In: Scientific data. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2052-4463. ; 6:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Thermal discomfort is one of the main triggers for occupants' interactions with components of the built environment such as adjustments of thermostats and/or opening windows and strongly related to the energy use in buildings. Understanding causes for thermal (dis-)comfort is crucial for design and operation of any type of building. The assessment of human thermal perception through rating scales, for example in post-occupancy studies, has been applied for several decades; however, long-existing assumptions related to these rating scales had been questioned by several researchers. The aim of this study was to gain deeper knowledge on contextual influences on the interpretation of thermal perception scales and their verbal anchors by survey participants. A questionnaire was designed and consequently applied in 21 language versions. These surveys were conducted in 57 cities in 30 countries resulting in a dataset containing responses from 8225 participants. The database offers potential for further analysis in the areas of building design and operation, psycho-physical relationships between human perception and the built environment, and linguistic analyses.
|
|
| 3. |
- Chinazzo, Giorgia, et al.
(author)
-
Quality criteria for multi-domain studies in the indoor environment: Critical review towards research guidelines and recommendations
- 2022
-
In: Building and Environment. - : Elsevier BV. - 0360-1323.
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The perception, physiology, behavior, and performance of building occupants are influenced by multi-domain exposures: the simultaneous presence of multiple environmental stimuli, i.e., visual, thermal, acoustic, and air quality. Despite being extensive, the literature on multi-domain exposures presents heterogeneous methodological approaches and inconsistent study reporting, which hinder direct comparison between studies and meta-analyses. Therefore, in addition to carrying out more multi-domain studies, such investigations need to be designed, conducted, and documented in a systematic and transparent way. With the goal to facilitate and support future multi-domain studies and their meta-analyses, this work provides (1) a range of criteria for multi-domain study design and reporting (i.e., defined as quality criteria), and (2) a critical review of the multi-domain literature based on the described criteria, which can serve as guidelines and recommendations for future studies on the topic. The identified quality criteria encompass study set-up, study deployment and analysis, and study outcome, stressing the importance of adopting a consistent terminology and result reporting style. The developed critical review highlights several shortcomings in the design, deployment, and documentation of multi-domain studies, emphasizing the need for quality improvements of future multi-domain research. The ultimate goal of this work is to consolidate our knowledge on multi-domain exposures for its integration into regulatory resources and guidelines, which are currently dominated by single-domain knowledge.
|
|
