The feeling of comfort in residential settings I: A qualitative model

Molina, G; Donn, M; Johnstone, M L and Macgregor, C (2023) The feeling of comfort in residential settings I: A qualitative model. Buildings & Cities, 4(1), pp. 422-440. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

Building science commonly studies comfort—a subjective concept—through quantitative methods. These methods are often not the most appropriate to study subjective concepts because they struggle to consider non-quantifiable factors that are sometimes relevant in the determination of people’s comfort. Complementing the already used quantitative methods with qualitative ones can help illuminate some of the areas where the former struggle, but this is an uncommon practice in building science. This paper presents the results of a qualitative study that aimed at understanding comfort without the constraints of it being quantifiable. It introduces the feeling of comfort model, which summarises what was found. This model suggests that most building science comfort models ignore more than two out of the three factors that determine people’s comfort. Additionally, it shows that it is potentially possible to make sense of the psychology and subjectivity of comfort in an organised and structured manner. This example of how qualitative methods can be a powerful addition to building science’s comfort research.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: comfort; indoor environmental quality; model; residential; simulation; thermal comfort; thermal perception
Index terms: thermal perception, quantitative method, comfort, indoor environmental quality, thermal comfort, psychology, building science, qualitative study, subjectivity, qualitative method
Subjects: occupational health and safety management, behavioral psychology, environmental health, environmental engineering, data analysis and analytics, engineering principles, research design and methodology, human factors and perception
Topics: Sustainability, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here