One of the outcomes of the COPE project is software to aid decision-makers in the ... aspects of the office design; e.g., cubicle size, partition height, ceiling tile ...
Environmental Satisfaction in Open-Plan Environments: 6. Satisfaction Algorithms for Software
Newsham, G.R.; Veitch, J.A.; Charles, K.E.; Marquardt, C.J.G.; Geerts, J.; Sander, D.
IRC-RR-155
April 2004
http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/ircpubs
Environmental Satisfaction in Open-Plan Environments: 6. Satisfaction Algorithms for Software
Environmental Satisfaction in Open-Plan Environments: 6. Satisfaction Algorithms for Software Guy R. Newsham, Jennifer A. Veitch, Kate E. Charles, Clinton J.G. Marquardt, Jan Geerts, Dan Sander
RR-155
-2-
240+
200-240
160-200
120-160
80-120
0.25 " We then followed the same process for other variables related to Satisfaction with Privacy, beginning with background noise levels (LNOISEA). Again, regressions from field study data showed no significant relationship between background noise and SatPriv scores. Nevertheless, there is considerable evidence from other studies that a relationship does exist [Veitch et al., 2002b; Navai and Veitch, 2003]. The relationship suggested by these other studies is quadratic, with too little background noise not providing enough sound masking, and too much background noise being annoying in itself. We therefore pursued a quadratic relationship for the Highly Satisfied and Highly Dissatisfied groups, shown in Figure 3. The curve fits are quite good, and generally support suggestions from other studies [Veitch et al., 2002b; Navai and Veitch, 2003]. Considering all sources of information, we propose the desired range of background noise level is 42–48 dBA. As suggested above, we consider background noise level on either side of this range to be associated with a negative satisfaction condition. Noise levels within the range provide some sound masking, and might lead to positive outcomes for SII, but can only be considered as a neutral satisfaction condition for background noise itself. Therefore, the algorithm relating Satisfaction with Privacy to background noise can be summarized as: Background Noise (dBA)
< 42 42 to 48 > 48
" "
One would expect partition height (MINPH_NOOPEN) to be associated with privacy, both through acoustic and visual privacy. Again, regressions from field study data showed no significant relationship between partition height and SatPriv scores. Nevertheless, there is evidence from other studies that a relationship does exist between partition height/enclosure and measures of satisfaction [Marquardt et al., 2002; Brill, 1984; Oldham, 1988; Oldham and Fried, 1987]. There is no theoretical reason to consider anything other than a linear relationship, and the result for the Highly Satisfied and Highly Dissatisfied groups is shown in Figure 4. The curve fits are imperfect, but are in the directions expected. The crossover point suggests a critical minimum partition height of 54 inches, which is in agreement with Brill [1984]. We consider a partition height lower than this value to be associated with a negative Satisfaction with Privacy condition, and a partition height higher than this as a neutral
RR-155
- 12 -
Environmental Satisfaction in Open-Plan Environments: 6. Satisfaction Algorithms for Software
condition. Therefore, the algorithm relating Satisfaction with Privacy to partition height can be summarized as: Min. Partition Ht. (in.)
< 54 ≥ 54
"
Finally, regressions from our field study data showed a significant relationship between workstation size (SQRTAREA) and SatPriv scores. This is consistent with the limited literature on the topic of occupant density and environmental satisfaction [Duval et al., 2002]. We explored the relationship for the Highly Satisfied and Highly Dissatisfied groups in our field study data, and the result is shown in Figure 5. There is no theoretical reason to pursue a quadratic relationship, however, quadratic curves do provide a much better fit to the data points. Even so, because of the lack of theoretical support, we treat the crossover point at larger workstation sizes as an artefact of the curve fitting. The lower crossover point suggests a critical workstation size of 8 ft x 8 ft (64 ft2). We consider a workstation smaller than this value to be associated with a negative Satisfaction with Privacy condition, and workstations bigger than this as a neutral condition. Therefore, the algorithm relating Satisfaction with Privacy to workstation area can be summarized as: WS Size (ft)
