Christel de Bakker, M. Aarts, H. Kort, E. van Loenen, A. Rosemann
{"title":"Preferred luminance distributions in open-plan offices in relation to time-of-day and subjective alertness","authors":"Christel de Bakker, M. Aarts, H. Kort, E. van Loenen, A. Rosemann","doi":"10.1080/15502724.2019.1587619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Dynamic lighting is one of the new trends in lighting research; providing the right lighting level at the right time could possibly increase the alertness and performance of office workers. However, they might have preferences that deviate from this “healthy” lighting. Simultaneously, the building environment becomes increasingly automated, with occupancy-based control as one of the most well-known examples to reduce offices’ lighting energy consumption. Nevertheless, preferences for lighting levels in the unoccupied area of the multi-occupant office space have not been addressed yet. Therefore, we studied luminance distribution preferences in relation to time of day and subjective alertness (SA) in a single occupancy scenario. Participants (N = 30) set the surrounding and background lighting six times a day as we first probed for SA. Our results clearly showed that a subset preferred varying luminance distributions; participants had fluctuating feelings of alertness, too. Preferences deviated sometimes from the typical dynamic lighting scenarios, suggesting that they do not always prefer healthy lighting. Moreover, we identified an effect of SA on the preferences, both with and without controlling for time of day. Hence, this study showed that we need to address these two factors when we want to provide satisfactory lighting conditions in case the office is not fully occupied. These are likely to affect other lighting preferences and therefore deserve more attention from research. Because we identified large individual differences, we suggest personalizing dynamic scenarios as the focus of future research.","PeriodicalId":49911,"journal":{"name":"Leukos","volume":"2017 1","pages":"3 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leukos","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2019.1587619","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
Abstract
ABSTRACT Dynamic lighting is one of the new trends in lighting research; providing the right lighting level at the right time could possibly increase the alertness and performance of office workers. However, they might have preferences that deviate from this “healthy” lighting. Simultaneously, the building environment becomes increasingly automated, with occupancy-based control as one of the most well-known examples to reduce offices’ lighting energy consumption. Nevertheless, preferences for lighting levels in the unoccupied area of the multi-occupant office space have not been addressed yet. Therefore, we studied luminance distribution preferences in relation to time of day and subjective alertness (SA) in a single occupancy scenario. Participants (N = 30) set the surrounding and background lighting six times a day as we first probed for SA. Our results clearly showed that a subset preferred varying luminance distributions; participants had fluctuating feelings of alertness, too. Preferences deviated sometimes from the typical dynamic lighting scenarios, suggesting that they do not always prefer healthy lighting. Moreover, we identified an effect of SA on the preferences, both with and without controlling for time of day. Hence, this study showed that we need to address these two factors when we want to provide satisfactory lighting conditions in case the office is not fully occupied. These are likely to affect other lighting preferences and therefore deserve more attention from research. Because we identified large individual differences, we suggest personalizing dynamic scenarios as the focus of future research.
期刊介绍:
The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in our publications. However, The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to, or arising out of the use of the Content. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions .