Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorZhang, Fan
dc.contributor.authorHaddad, Shamila
dc.contributor.authorNakisa, Bahareh
dc.contributor.authorRastgoo, Mohammad Naim
dc.contributor.authorCandido, Christhina
dc.contributor.authorTjondronegoro, Dian
dc.contributor.authorde Dear, Richard
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-19T12:31:05Z
dc.date.available2018-11-19T12:31:05Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn0360-1323
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.06.048
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/381230
dc.description.abstractTypical commercial lease agreements in Australia stipulate 22.5 ± 1.5 °C in summer as the acceptable thermal condition that buildings have to meet, even though the overcooling incurs excessive and unnecessary energy use, gas emissions and financial expense. An argument that backs up this practice asserts that office workers' productivity and comfort will be jeopardised outside this temperature range. This paper investigated whether the office environments with a practical higher temperature setpoint can still be cognitively efficient and comfortable for office workers. In a controlled climate chamber, 26 office workers experienced the typical summer indoor temperature condition in Australia (22 °C) followed by the condition with a higher temperature setpoint (25 °C). In both conditions, subjects were required to fulfil Cambridge Brain Science (CBS) cognitive performance tests, NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), and thermal comfort and air quality questionnaires. Meanwhile, participants' electroencephalogram (EEG) and heart rate (HR) were recorded under three different difficulty levels of Paced Auditory Serial Addition Tests (PASAT). Results showed that CBS test scores were not significantly affected by temperature; a higher temperature of 25 °C incurred a significantly reduced cognitive load for subjects, as has been observed by NASA-TLX, but probably due to the learning effect; the comparison between EEG and HR features during different temperatures did not show any significant difference. Participants' thermal comfort was not significantly jeopardized by the 3 °C temperature setback either. Results from this study favourably support a practical setback of temperature setpoints in Australian office buildings during summer.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom176
dc.relation.ispartofpageto188
dc.relation.ispartofjournalBuilding and Environment
dc.relation.ispartofvolume123
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBuilt Environment and Design not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchArchitecture
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBuilding
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEnvironmental Science and Management
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode129999
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1201
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1202
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode0502
dc.titleThe effects of higher temperature setpoints during summer on office workers' cognitive load and thermal comfort
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
dcterms.licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.description.versionPost-print
gro.rights.copyright© 2017 Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, providing that the work is properly cited.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorZhang, Fan
gro.griffith.authorTjondronegoro, Dian W.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record