Annotated Bibliographies III Part 2

Annotated Bibliography III Part 2

Environment Behavior Research

Professor:  Nora Rubinstein, Ph.D.

Graduate Candidate: Christopher Parrish

October 17th, 2011

Heschong, L. (1979). Thermal Delight in Architecture (pp. 17-31). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Heschong speaks to the sensuousness of thermal variations and the layers of senses we use to perceive it.  In her chapter titled “Delight”, she illustrates the various means by which we sense and perceive the hotness and the coldness of places and objects.  Followed by “Affection”, the chapter devoted to our connection and interaction with the thermal world.

Delight

People enjoy the direct adjacency of dueling thermal variations, such as extreme hot and cold, for both physiological and aesthetic reasons.  The physiological need for control of thermal balance is achieved through access to both extremes.  The aesthetic need is fulfilled by creating a contrast between the two extremes that provides comfort (even without the necessity to experience both); such as, winter’s storm outside and the cozy fire inside.

Similar to our auditory (Tonkiss, 2003) and olfactory (Owen, 2010) senses, memory is tightly tied to our perception of thermal qualities.  We reference past experiences to make predictions or expectations for new places and objects.  These associations are made between the thermal qualities of the old and projected onto the new.  “Perhaps it will be warm like my wool sweater is [because it is soft and fuzzy].”

The expectations based on memory can sometimes be strong enough to substitute for the real thermal experience.  A video recording of a fire crackling in the hearth can make people “feel” warmer even if the physical temperature has not changed since the auditory senses of the crackle/hissing and the visual senses of the flames are triggering the response of warmth.  The sound of chimes hanging in the window can bring the suggestion of a cooling breeze.  Sometimes, the inconsistency of what memory and senses are relaying to people creates a confusion and unsatisfactory dissociation of thermal qualities.  If the built environment appears cool but is actually warm, a negative association is created.  This confusion of the senses is a quality that sustainable environments should avoid.

Some associations can have a subconscious link to thermal qualities.  The author points out that material can suggest warm and cold based on their history; she gives the example of a wool sweater and how people may associate the wool with the sheep it came from and the warmth the living sheep held.  This is an important connection between people, materiality, and connection to place.  The materials chosen for created objects and spaces in the built environment have deeper meanings and associations than may be immediately perceived.  The use of materials that resonate with the users of created spaces will endure and be preserved.

Affection

The author links the rituals and customs of people to their thermal relationship with the world.  Thermal comfort and affection are not culturally universal.  A sense of thermal well-being can create a feeling of “fondness” for a particular place.  “Fondness for a particular place or thing is often manifested in the extra care that people invest in it…”  Sustainably built environments should seek to instill this feeling of thermal comfort and “fondness”.  In the mono-thermal (steady state) environment that modern buildings seek to maintain, a disassociation and lack of “fondness” occurs due to a loss of focus on thermal qualities.  A thermal contrast is needed for appreciation to develop.

Heschong notes that the thermal insulating qualities of a wall may go unnoticed because it is not visually dynamic (like window shutters which are visible) and the thermal mechanisms are hidden behind finished surfaces.  This is very important for sustainable environments in that it points out the need for people to “see” the thermal qualities “in action.” Places that possess dynamic qualities that show their interaction with the natural world will be appreciated and foster an appreciation for the thermal qualities of construction.  She also notes construction methods where layers of insulation are added during colder seasons and removed during warmer months (like wall tapestries).  This idea of a building being dynamic rather than static is anti-“modern” (International Style) and modern at the same time.  Why should a building be designed to stand “as is” without adapting to an ever changing environment?  Sustainability would suggest adaptability rather than static consistency.

With the creation of uniform comfort levels inside built environments, a decentralization of activity has occurred; where once people huddled around a central stove for warmth, people can now move throughout their homes and be comfortable anywhere at any time.  This has led to a change in the way people socialize within the built environment; one may argue that people are more independent but isolated from the whole.

In her exploration of place, Heschong notes that “…thermal information… contributes to our sense of the particular personality, or spirit, that we identify with that place [and]… that if we return, we will have the same sense of comfort or relaxation as before.”  This statement is very powerful for designers of the built environment since it shows a direct correlation between thermal information (comfort/well-being) and the value placed on it (fondness).  Spaces that have “value” will be maintained and preserved.

Gertner, J. (2009, 19 April). Why isn’t the brain green? The New York Times.

Answers to our response to climate change need to happen not only in the technology sector but also in the social sciences.  Global climate change is the result of human actions and behaviors; it is logical to assume that part of the answer lies in having a greater understanding of human behavior.  In this article, the author explains a series of experiences he has recently encountered with behavior researchers who are trying to address global warming through behavioral experiments conducted at Columbia University by the Center for Research on Environmental Decisions.

Through their various experiments, the researchers are trying to determine why people make the choices they do.  What influences them to make broader choices that benefit future generations but may cost the current generation?  What kinds of decisions do people make as individuals versus when they are a member of a group or team?  Some of their initial findings show that people are more willing to think about long-term benefits when they decide as a group.  This is very important to sustainability due to the necessity to plan for many future generations.  The testing shows that it may be better to address issues such as climate change with groups of people (communities) rather than working with individuals.  It is also noted that people will accept environmental fees (carbon offset) if they are phrased as “fees” rather than “taxes”.  In appealing to behavioral tendencies, it is clear from this article that green and sustainable practices can be made “easier to swallow” if they are phrased appropriately. 

Gertner acknowledges the coercive power that the results of this knowledge could hold by advancing an agenda.  The researchers agree but state, “We’re [people are] always trying to push some agenda” and that “… whatever we do… has some value judgment built into it.”  They ultimately illustrate that the use of behavioral sciences can give people a push toward better (positive to the environment) choices.

Kwok, A.G., & Rajkovich, N. (2009). Addressing climate change in comfort standards. Building and Environment, 45(1), 18-22

In their manifesto, Kwok and Rjakovich outline a set of mandates that they argue is needed to both mitigate and adapt to global climate change.  Since heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems currently use the largest percentage of energy in the built environment, the authors have decided to begin with changes to the status quo with the intention of reducing greenhouse gases, energy use, and creating a shift in approach to indoor thermal comfort.

Kwok and Rajkovich coin the term “mesocomfort zone” referring to the range in thermal temperature between being comfortable and involuntary physiological actions taking place, such as sweating or shivering.  They postulate that this range should be explored in an effort to provide a dynamic thermal experience that more efficiently utilizes energy resources and allows users and buildings flexibility in responses to changing environmental conditions.  They list three examples:

1.     “Allow occupants, building owners, and design teams to set satisfaction criteria.”  This means that the systems are not designed to a one-size-fits-all standard but can be tailored to the client/users.  It may be decided that a greater range of temperatures is acceptable and can be planned for from the beginning.

2.     “Increase air movement allowances.” For passive spaces that utilize cross and stack ventilation, this would increase convective cooling and comfort.

3.     “Switch-rich design.” By providing control of the thermal environment through “switches” (of various kinds), people and buildings can respond to changing environmental conditions.

They continue by stating that more adaptable buildings will be better equipped in facing changing climatic conditions.  “Passive, low-energy buildings with redundant and overlapping control strategies will offer the highest opportunity for adaptation.”  Creating buildings that allow for user control also provide for a greater range of thermal experiences and perceptions of comfort.  They argue that people are more willing to tolerate warmer or cooler temperatures (occupant forgiveness) if they are allowed to open a window, turn on a fan, or wear weather appropriate clothing. 

Similar to Heschong (1979), the authors point out the large range of thermal comfort levels and illustrate that the more adaptive and dynamic (consisting of more controls) the built environment is, the more equipped the space is to react to climatic change.  This is key to creating sustainable spaces that are responsive to both their users and the environment.