Moschandreas, D J; Yoon, S H and Demirev, D (2006) Validation of the indoor environmental quality conceptual model. Building Research & Information, 34(5), pp. 483-495. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) conceptual model is validated with an independent consultant generated database that was not used for its formulation. The model uses the Indoor Environmental Index (IEI) to assess the IEQ and select among three management options. IEI values are either calculated using measured environmental variables or predicted by a simple linear regression model with the Percent of Occupants with Two or More Persistent Symptoms (POPS2) index as the independent variable. Responses to a questionnaire determine POPS2 values. The paper investigates if the predicted IEI values lead to the same IEQ management decisions as the expensive calculated IEI values. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between predicted and calculated IEI values. The second objective examines the consultant effect on environmental stressor and IEI measurements by testing the null hypothesis of no difference among consultants. The difference between the calculated and predicted IEI values is not statistically significant and the inexpensive predicted values can be used for management purposes. The consultant effect on IEI values is statistically significant but interpreted to have no practical importance because it does not affect selection of management options. Consequently, it is argued that the conceptual model can be used as a proactive management tool that may be used to improve and maintain IEQ.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building assessment; consultant comparison; environmental indices; indoor environment; model validation; occupant symptoms; offices |
| Index terms: | building assessment, regression model, independent variable, database, indoor environment, management decision, indoor environmental quality, questionnaire, validation, testing, option |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, professional practice, environmental science, professional development, decision-making and reasoning, environmental health, statistical analysis, decision analysis, asset management, data management |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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