Willems, S; Saelens, D and Heylighen, A (2022) Discrepancies between predicted and actual indoor environmental (dis)comfort: The role of hospitalized patients' adaptation strategies. Building Research & Information, 50(7), pp. 792-809. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Hospitals' indoor conditions affect patients' comfort. Comfort is predicted based on threshold values for indoor environmental quality (IEQ) indicators, but discrepancies with actual (dis)comfort occur. Current prediction methods ignore the role of patients' adaptation or treat it as a 'black box'. Therefore, we investigated how distinguishing between adaptation strategies may help explain discrepancies. We combined sensor measurements of IEQ indicators (sound, light, temperature) at two hospital wards with a questionnaire among 238 patients. After grouping respondents according to their adaptation strategy, we investigated relationships between strategies, respondents' experiences of indoor conditions and measured values of IEQ indicators. Experiences differ when respondents' adaptation strategy differs. Satisfaction votes are higher when sensation votes are more neutral or more as preferred. This occurs when respondents adapt behaviourally (i.e. adapt indoor conditions) or do not wish to adapt indoor conditions (e.g. adapt sensations), rather than when adapting psychologically (i.e. by choice or imposed). Adaptation strategies influence measured values differently, but this cannot explain differences in experiences. Adaptation strategies therefore seem to influence experiences in a psychological way, which current methods cannot predict. Attending to how adaptation influences experiences of indoor conditions and how this differs between adaptation strategies, can thus contribute to reducing discrepancies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adaptation; comfort; hospital; indoor environmental quality |
| Index terms: | adaptation, satisfaction, indoor environmental quality, comfort, sensation, strategy, prediction method, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | management, occupational health and safety management, environmental health, data collection methods, user focus, human factors and perception, data analysis and analytics, project delivery |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CA |
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