Human stress responses in office-like environments with wood furniture

Burnard, M D and Kutnar, A (2020) Human stress responses in office-like environments with wood furniture. Building Research & Information, 48(3), pp. 316-330. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Stress is a major public health concern and work stress is a contributor to both acute and chronic stress. Moreover, most people spend the majority of their time indoors. It follows that the design of office spaces and other interior environments should consider the health impacts of individuals in terms of psychophysiological responses to stress. In this way, buildings can act as an environmental intervention to compliment social and therapeutic interventions to stress. In this study, human stress responses were compared in experimental office settings with and without wood. The hypothesis was that the office setting with wood furniture would reduce stress responses and improve stress recovery as indicated by salivary cortisol concentration. The within-subjects experiment revealed that overall stress levels were lower in the office-like environment with oak wood than the control room, but there was no detectable difference in stress levels between the office-like environment with walnut wood and the control room. Stress recovery was not found to differ between either environment, possibly because duration of the experiment was too short or that not enough samples were taken during the recovery period.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: healthy offices; indoor environment; materials; occupant stress; timber; well-being
Index terms: experiment, work stress, well-being, public health, indoor environment, healthy office, wood, recovery, office space, duration
Subjects: traditional and composite building materials, environmental health, project controls, occupational health and safety management, data collection methods, construction type, mental health and wellbeing, environmental science, psychology, operations management
Topics: Time Control, Project Management, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Sustainability
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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