Review of multi‐domain approaches to indoor environmental perception and behaviour

Schweiker, Marcel and Ampatzi, Eleni and Andargie, Maedot S. and Andersen, Rune Korsholm and Azar, Elie and Barthelmes, Verena M. and Berger, Christiane and Bourikas, Leonidas and Carlucci, Salvatore and Chinazzo, Giorgia and Edappilly, Lakshmi Prabha and Favero, Matteo and Gauthier, Stephanie and Jamrozik, Anja and Kane, Michael and Mahdavi, Ardeshir and Piselli, Cristina and Pisello, Anna Laura and Roetzel, Astrid and Rysanek, Adam and Sharma, Kunind and Zhang, Shengbo (2020) Review of multi‐domain approaches to indoor environmental perception and behaviour. Building and Environment, 176: 106804. ISSN 0360-1323

Text (1-s2.0-S0360132320301621-main)
1_s2.0_S0360132320301621_main.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs.
Download (9MB)

Abstract

Building occupants are continuously exposed to multiple indoor environmental stimuli, including thermal, visual, acoustic, and air quality related factors. Moreover, personal and contextual aspects can be regarded as additional domains influencing occupants’ perception and behaviour. The scientific literature in this area typically deals with these multiple stimuli in isolation. In contrast to single-domain research, multi-domain research analyses at least two different domains, for example, visual and thermal. The relatively few literature reviews that have considered multi-domain approaches to indoor-environmental perception and behaviour covered only a few dozen articles each. The present contribution addresses this paucity by reviewing 219 scientific papers on interactions and cross-domain effects that influence occupants’ indoor environmental perception and behaviour. The objective of the present review is to highlight motivational backgrounds, key methodologies, and major findings of multi-domain investigations of human perception and behaviour in indoor environments. The in-depth review of these papers provides not only an overview of the state of the art, but also contributes to the identification of existing knowledge gaps in this area and the corresponding need for future research. In particular, many studies use “convenience” variables and samples, there is often a lack of theoretical foundation to studies, and there is little research linking perception to action.