{"title":"Predicting Window View Preferences Using the Environmental Information Criteria","authors":"M. Kent, S. Schiavon","doi":"10.1080/15502724.2022.2077753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Daylighting standards provide an assessment method that can be used to evaluate the quality of window views. As part of this evaluation process, designers must achieve five environmental information criteria (location, time, weather, nature, and people) to obtain an excellent view. To the best of our knowledge, these criteria have not yet been verified and their scientific validity remains conjectural. In a two-stage experiment, a total of 451 persons evaluated six window view images. Using machine learning models, we found that the five criteria could provide accurate predictions for window view preferences. When one view was largely preferred over the other, the accuracy of decision tree models ranged from 83% to 90%. For smaller differences in preference, the accuracy was 67%. As ratings given to the five criteria increased, so did evaluations for psychological restoration and positive affect. Although causation was not established, the role of most environmental information criteria was important for predicting window view preferences, with nature generally outweighed the others. We recommend the use of the environmental information criteria in practice, but suggest some alterations to these standards to emphasize the importance of nature within window view design. Instead of only supporting high-quality views, nature should be promoted across all thresholds dictating view quality.","PeriodicalId":49911,"journal":{"name":"Leukos","volume":"68 1","pages":"190 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leukos","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2022.2077753","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
ABSTRACT Daylighting standards provide an assessment method that can be used to evaluate the quality of window views. As part of this evaluation process, designers must achieve five environmental information criteria (location, time, weather, nature, and people) to obtain an excellent view. To the best of our knowledge, these criteria have not yet been verified and their scientific validity remains conjectural. In a two-stage experiment, a total of 451 persons evaluated six window view images. Using machine learning models, we found that the five criteria could provide accurate predictions for window view preferences. When one view was largely preferred over the other, the accuracy of decision tree models ranged from 83% to 90%. For smaller differences in preference, the accuracy was 67%. As ratings given to the five criteria increased, so did evaluations for psychological restoration and positive affect. Although causation was not established, the role of most environmental information criteria was important for predicting window view preferences, with nature generally outweighed the others. We recommend the use of the environmental information criteria in practice, but suggest some alterations to these standards to emphasize the importance of nature within window view design. Instead of only supporting high-quality views, nature should be promoted across all thresholds dictating view quality.
期刊介绍:
The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in our publications. However, The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and our publisher Taylor & Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to, or arising out of the use of the Content. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions .