A research team lead by Alkozei has learned that being in blue light continues to affect how our minds work—experiencing blue light has been linked to higher alertness and quicker decision making—even after we leave a blue lit area. As a press release issued by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine reports “a short single exposure to blue light for half an hour is sufficient to produce measurable changes in reaction times and more efficient responses (answered more items correctly per second) . . . after the light exposure had ended. . . .
Converting seated meetings to walking meetings is good for our physical health. A study published in Preventing Chronic Disease indicates that “Changing just one seated meeting . . . into a walking meeting increased the work-related physical activity levels of white-collar workers by 10 minutes. . .
It seems that acquiring things can indeed make us happy, as long as the new items align with our personality. Matz, Gladstone, and Stillwell report that “In a field study using more than 76,000 bank-transaction records, we found that individuals spend more on products that match their personality, and that people whose purchases better match their personality report higher levels of life satisfaction. . . .
Pilcher and Baker wanted to learn more about the relationship between moving in some way while working and professional performance. They had people participating in their study work on a desktop while pedaling (at a FitDesk, described below) and also at a traditional sedentary desk. The researchers found that when study “participants pedaled the stationary bicycle at a slow pace (similar in exertion to a normal walking pace) while working. . . cognitive task performance did not change between the two workstations.
Pecca and Kwan share interesting insights on designing spaces to promote human exposure to the “right” sort of microbes. As they describe, “The study of how building design, occupancy, and human activity impact indoor microbial communities can lead to the design of healthier buildings, and better enable studies that seek to identify the sources of beneficial and detrimental microbes. . . . Designing our buildings to promote beneficial microbial exposures is not yet feasible.
Weiner identifies locations where, historically and today, creative genius has been particularly prevalent, exploring connections between geography—and other factors—and concentrations of creative people. For example, he discusses Renaissance Florence and Vienna in 1900. Weiner’s focus is on urban settings and culture’s important role in spurring creativity. Some cognitive science research on spaces where people are more likely to think creatively is referenced in the book; regular readers of Research Design Connections will be familiar with the insights that can be drawn from s
Swanson and her team have found that psychological wellbeing levels are higher when people have more sunlight in their homes. During research conducted in Scotland, the researchers estimated how much natural light could possibly enter a home, factoring in window size and orientation, if anything (such as furniture) was blocking the flow of light into a home and occupant behavior. They called their estimate “annual sunlight opportunity.” Calculations identified “a significant positive association between well-being and annual indoor sunlight opportunity but no relationship between sunligh
Want people to purchase good-for-them produce? Draw arrows to those fruits and veggies on a store’s floor. Payne and his team did research in stores, and what they learned can be applied not only in stores but also at cafeterias and other places where people will select food. The researchers placed 10 large (6 feet long and 3 feet wide) green arrows on the floor of a grocery store, all in highly visible locations along the outer edge of its interior floor space, pointing toward the produce section of the store. The arrows had graphics of fruits and vegetables on them and messages such a
Some of us are more attentive to the people around us and others to the place we're in. McIntyre and Graziano report that “Individuals differ in how they deploy attention to their physical and social environments. . . . we conducted two studies to explore the links among attentional processes and interests in people and things. . . .
Mehta and Zhu have learned that when we believe that resources are limited, we may think more creatively. As a press release for their study, published in the Journal of Consumer Research, states, “A series of studies showed that scarcity versus abundance leads to creativity by encouraging more novel use of everyday items. Consumers preconditioned to think in terms of scarcity and constraint came up with more innovative, nontraditional uses for the same items given to consumers preconditioned to think in terms of abundance. . . .