Proximity Still Matters (07-14-17)
Researchers associated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have found that where we work has a significant effect on who we work with, still (Claudel, Massaro, Santi, Murray, and Ratti, 2017). The investigators report that “Academic research is increasingly cross-disciplinary and collaborative, between and within institutions. . . . We examine the collaboration patterns of faculty at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology . . . over a 10-year time span.” A press release issued by MIT reviewing the work of Claudel and his team states that their research “revealed the importance of spatial relations on campus, above and beyond departmental and institutional structures. . . . .the study finds that cross-disciplinary and interdepartmental collaboration is fueled by basic face-to-face interaction. . . .When it comes to co-authoring papers, researchers located in the same workspace [office suite, for example] are more than three times as likely to collaborate compared to those who are 400 meters apart. The frequency of collaboration further drops in half when researchers are 800 meters apart. For patents, that curve is slightly less steep. Researchers in the same workspace are more than twice as likely to collaborate compared to those who are 400 meters apart. But the frequency of collaboration does not diminish as quickly, and only drops in half again when researchers are 1,600 meters apart. . . . as the paper notes, however, for both papers and patents there is ‘a persistent relationship between physical proximity and intensity of collaboration.’"
Matthew Claudel, Emanuele Massaro, Paolo Santi, Fiona Murray, and Carlo Ratti. 2017. “An Exploration of Collaborative Scientific Production at MIT Through Spatial Organization and Institutional Affiliation.” PLoS ONE, vol. 12, no. 6.
Peter Dizikes. 2017. “Proximity Boosts Collaboration on MIT Campus.” MIT press release, http://news.mit.edu/2017/proximity-boosts-collaboration-mit-campus-0710
Photos and Experience (07-13-17)
Taking a photograph of something influences our sensory memories of it. Barasch and her team (in press) found that “even without revisiting any photos, participants who could freely take photographs during an experience recognized more of what they saw and less of what they heard, compared with those who could not take any photographs. Further, merely taking mental photos had similar effects on memory. These results provide support for the idea that photo taking induces a shift in attention toward visual aspects and away from auditory aspects of an experience. . . . Participants with a camera had better recognition of aspects of the scene that they photographed than of aspects they did not photograph. Furthermore, participants who used a camera during their experience recognized even nonphotographed aspects better than participants without a camera did.” These findings may be useful to people analyzing research data, particularly if space/object users have been asked to take photographs of specific spaces/objects, such as those where they feel they work most creatively.
Previously, Diehl, Zauberman, and Barasch (2016) learned that “taking photos enhances enjoyment of positive experiences across a range of contexts. . . . This occurs when photo taking increases engagement with the experience, which is less likely when the experience itself is already highly engaging, or when photo-taking interferes with the experience. . . . we also find that this greater engagement due to photo-taking results in worse evaluations of negative experiences.”
Kristin Diehl, Gal Zauberman, and Alixandra Barasch. 2016. “How Taking Photos Increases Enjoyment of Experiences.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 119-140.
Alexandra Barasch, Kristin Diehl, Jackie Silverman, and Gal Zauberman. “Photographic Memory: The Effects of Volitional Photo Taking on Memory for Visual and Auditory Aspects of an Experience.” Psychological Science, in press.
Noise and Infertility (07-11-17)
Min and Min linked exposure to loud-ish noises and male infertility. The researchers report that they “examined an association between daytime and nocturnal noise exposures over four years . . .. and subsequent male infertility. We used the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort (2002–2013), a population-wide health insurance claims dataset. A total of 206,492 males of reproductive age (20–59 years) with no history of congenital malformations were followed up for an 8-year period. . . . Data on noise exposure was obtained from the National Noise Information System. . . . Based on WHO criteria, adjusted odds for infertility were significantly increased . . . in males exposed to night time noise ≥ 55 dB. We found a significant association between exposure to environmental noise for four years and the subsequent incidence of male infertility, suggesting long-term exposure to noise has a role in pathogenesis of male infertility.” Statistical tools were used to eliminate factors such as age, income, and BMI as possible explanations for the effects found.
Kyoung-Bok Min and Jin-Young Min. 2017. “Exposure to Environmental Noise and Risk for Male Infertility: A Population-Based Cohort Study.” Environmental Pollution, vol. 226, pp. 118-124.
Phones and Thinking (07-10-17)
If they’re nearby, our phones effect how we think—in ways that complicate the development of workplaces where people work to their full potential—even if they’re turned off. Researchers found that “Your cognitive capacity is significantly reduced when your smartphone is within reach — even if it’s off. . . . researchers asked study participants to sit at a computer and take a series of tests that required full concentration in order to score well. . . . Before beginning, participants were randomly instructed to place their smartphones either on the desk face down, in their pocket or personal bag, or in another room. All participants were instructed to turn their phones to silent. . . . participants with their phones in another room significantly outperformed those with their phones on the desk, and they also slightly outperformed those participants who had kept their phones in a pocket or bag. The findings suggest that the mere presence of one’s smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity and impairs cognitive functioning. . . . it didn’t matter whether a person’s smartphone was turned on or off, or whether it was lying face up or face down on a desk.”
“The Mere Presence of Your Smartphone Reduces Brain Power, Study Shows.” 2017. Press release, The University of Texas at Austin, https://news.utexas.edu/2017/06/26/the-mere-presence-of-your-smartphone-reduces-brain-power
Enjoying Activities (07-07-17)
Chim and her colleagues studied the alignment between people’s preferred mood and their responses to the activities they’re engaged in. The investigators determined that “people derive more enjoyment from activities that match how they ideally want to feel (their “ideal affect”). . . . the authors conducted 4 studies that examined whether valuing calm and other low arousal positive states (LAP) increased enjoyment of calming (vs. exciting) activities. . . . the more participants valued LAP, the more enjoyment they experienced during calming (vs. exciting) amusement park rides, both in the United States and Hong Kong.” These findings by Chim and her team may help designers better understand data collected during the programming phases of projects, for example.
Louise Chim, Candice Hogan, Helene Fung, and Jeanne Tsai. “Valuing Calm Enhances Enjoyment of Calming (vs. Exciting) Amusement Park Rides and Exercise.” Emotion, in press.
Hospital Art Preferences (07-05-17)
Nielsen and her team investigated the sorts of art preferred by hospital patients. They determined that patients “primarily ranked items to favor figurative art painted in light colors.”
Stine Nielsen, Michael Mullins, Lars Fich, and Kirsten Roessler. 2017. “The Significance of Certain Elements in Art for Patients’ Experience and Use.” Visual Anthropology, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 310-327.
Design in Spaces for Concentration (07-03-17)
A research team lead by Huckels-Baumgart found that separate medication rooms in hospitals are a good investment. They report that “Interruptions and errors during the medication process are common. . . . Our aim was to evaluate the effect of separate medication rooms on interruptions during medication preparation and on self-reported medication error rates. We performed a preintervention and postintervention study using direct structured observation of nurses during medication preparation and daily structured medication error self-reporting of nurses by questionnaires in 2 wards at a major teaching hospital in Switzerland. . . . After the introduction of the separate medication room, the mean interruption rate decreased significantly from 51.8 to 30 interruptions per hour . . . and the interruption-free preparation time increased significantly from 1.4 to 2.5 minutes. . . . Overall, the mean medication error rate per day was also significantly reduced after implementation of the separate medication room from 1.3 to 0.9 errors per day.” Data were collected from the same group of nurses before and after the separate medication rooms were introduced and medication administration processes did not change when the separate medication rooms were introduced. The information gathered by Huckels-Baumgart and her colleagues highlights the advantages of doing any work requiring focus without distractions.
Saskia Huckels-Baumgart, Andre Baumgart, Ute Buschmann, Guido Schupfer, and Tanja Manser. “Separate Medication Preparation Rooms Reduce Interruptions and Medication Errors in the Hospital Setting: A Prospective Observational Study.” Journal of Patient Safety, in press.
Microbes! (06-30-17)
Environmental microbes, and how they influence how we think and behave, were a hot topic of discussion at NeoCon this year. A 2016 article in Building and Environment, whose text is available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132316303419 , shares important insights on these topics.
Adams and her team report that “Buildings represent habitats for microorganisms that can have direct or indirect effects on the quality of our living spaces, health, and well-being.”
The researchers organize their discussion as answers to 10 questions that they feel indicate “important lessons learned regarding the microbiology of buildings and suggest future areas of investigation.” These questions are: “Q1) What does the microbiome of a typical indoor environment look like? Q2) How do building characteristics, including occupants and their behaviors, influence the indoor microbiome? Q3) How do moisture problems alter typical indoor microbiomes? Q4) How does the microbiome affect indoor chemistry, and how do chemical processes and the composition of building materials influence the indoor microbiome? Q5) What do DNA sequencing and modern analytical techniques tell us about the indoor environment? Q6) What are appropriate sampling methods and constraints for studies of the microbiology of the built environment? Q7) What technological developments will enhance our understanding of the microbiology of the built environment? Q8) What are the connections between indoor microbiomes and occupant health? Q9) What are the implications of recent work for building design and maintenance? Q10) What do all these recent studies NOT tell us?”
The article by Adams and her colleagues is a handy, relatively easy to read introduction to a topic that is likely to be discussed with increased frequency in the months ahead—microbes!
Rachel Adams, Seema Bhangar, Karen Dannemiller, Jonathan Eisen, Noah Fierer, Jack Gilbert, Jessica Green, Linsey Marr, Shelly Miller, Jeffrey Siegel, Brent Stephens, Michael Waring, and Kyle Bibby. 2016. “Ten Questions Concerning the Microbiomes of Buildings.” Building and Environment, vol. 109, pp. 224-234.
Dirt’s Tale (06-29-17)
Bogard carefully details, in The Ground Beneath Us, how the dirt under our feet affects our lives. He reports on the biological implications of paving over it, for example, and generally makes the point that the ground is a valuable resource that we should use wisely. Dirt is much more than simply the outer skin of our planet and pavement may not really be our friend. The text of The Ground Beneath Us makes it clear that dirt is closely tied to both our history and future as a species.
Paul Bogard. 2017. The Ground Beneath Us: From the Oldest Cities to the Latest Wilderness, What Dirt Tells Us About Who We Are. Little, Brown and Company: New York.
Words and Sensory Experiences (06-28-17)
Mathot, Grainger, and Strijkers link words and sensory experiences. As they describe, “Theories about embodiment of language hold that when you process a word’s meaning, you automatically simulate associated sensory input (e.g., perception of brightness when you process lamp). . . . we measured pupillary responses to single words that conveyed a sense of brightness (e.g., day) or darkness (e.g., night) or were neutral (e.g., house). We found that pupils were largest for words conveying darkness, of intermediate size for neutral words, and smallest for words conveying brightness. This pattern was found for both visually presented and spoken words, which suggests that it was due to the words’ meanings, rather than to visual or auditory properties of the stimuli. Our findings suggest that word meaning is sufficient to trigger a pupillary response, even when this response is not imposed by the experimental task, and even when this response is beyond voluntary control.”
Sebastiaan Mathot, Jonathan Grainger, and Kristof Strijkers. “Pupillary Responses to Words That Convey a Sense of Brightness or Darkness.” Psychological Science, in press.
Temperature Related to Helping Others (06-27-17)
Belkin and Kouchaki set out to learn how the temperature of the place people are in influences how they think and behave. When they: “analyz[ed] . . . field data from a chain of retail stores in Eastern Europe, we find that, in hot, as opposed to normal temperatures, employees are [50%] less likely to act in a prosocial manner.” Perceptions of temperatures as uncomfortably warm seem to be responsible for the effects seen. Prosocial behaviors are acts we voluntarily perform that benefit others, such as making helpful suggestions. Data collected in other environments by Belkin and Kouchaki, some uncomfortably warm, others comfortable temperatures, revealed a consistent relationship between temperature and helping behavior – higher temperatures, less helping others. The research team report that “heat increases fatigue that leads to reduction in positive affect [mood] and subsequently reduces individual helping.”
Liuba Belkin and Maryam Kouchaki. “Exploring the Impact of Ambient Temperature on Helping.” European Journal of Social Psychology, in press.
Art for Humanity’s Sake (06-26-17)
Kim and Kim thoroughly researched how seeing art influences decisions made. They found that “artistic cues [seeing art, paintings by Maritt and Kandinsky] lead participants to . . . . [make] prosocial choice[s]. . . . The central idea of this research is that artistic cues . . . influence consumers’ choice, specifically by promoting acceptance of prosocial appeal over proself appeal.” Prosocial behaviors are things we voluntarily do that benefit others, such as making charitable donations and recycling.
Dooiee Kim and Sang-Hoon Kim. “Art Beyond Art’s Sake: The Influence of Artistic Cues on Prosocial Choice.” Empirical Studies of the Arts, in press.
Biking and Stress Levels (06-23-17)
Brutus, Javadian, and Panaccio linked commuting to work by bicycle to lower stress levels among those who biked to the office just after they arrived at work—which should encourage urban planners to design in bicycle lanes and others to create on-site bicycle storage facilities. The researchers learned that employees “who cycled to work were less stressed than their counterparts who arrived by car. However, there was no difference in mood among the different mode users [modes: biking to work, driving a car to work, or traveling to work via public transportation].” Participants were asked about their commuting-related stress within the first 45 minutes after they arrived at work.
Stephane Brutus, Roshan Javadian, and Alexandra Panaccio. 2017. “Cycling, Car, or Public Transit: A Study of Stress and Mood Upon Arrival at Work.” International Journal of Workplace Health Management, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 13-24.
Using Stuff to Describe Ourselves (06-22-17)
Rozenkrants, Wheeler, and Shiv studied how humans convey information about themselves through the products they choose. The researchers found that “Previous research has shown that material goods can help people self-express, either because the products are themselves self-expressive (e.g., a band t-shirt) or because the products are associated with a desired group.” The Rozenkrants lead team focused on how polarized opinions affect messages sent by objects. Polarization of opinions about products was described as occurring when “some people strongly like the product and other people strongly dislike the product.” Rozenkrants and colleagues found that “polarizing products are perceived to be more self-expressive and to serve as stronger indicators of one’s tastes and personality. . . . These effects emerge when the bimodal distribution [i.e., the polarizing factor] pertains to a self-expressive attribute (e.g., style) but not when it pertains to a non-self-expressive attribute (i.e., quality).”
Bella Rozenkrants, S. Wheeler, and Baba Shiv. “Self-Expression Cues in Product Rating Distributions: When People Prefer Polarizing Products.” Journal of Consumer Research, in press.
Sensory Thoughts: Implications (06-21-17)
The sorts of sensory experiences we think about influence the opinions we form in intriguing ways. Elder and his team report that via multiple studies they found that “imagined senses that require close proximity to the body in order to be sensed (i.e., taste, touch)” affect our attitudes in different ways than those “that do not require such close proximity (i.e., hearing, sight)” (quotes from published study).
When people were asked to imagine the tastes they would experience at a restaurant, they reported that the restaurant in question was physically closer to their location than they did when they were asked to imagine the visual experiences they would have in that restaurant. When study participants read restaurant reviews that described proximal sensory experiences (those related to taste and touch) and were asked to make reservations at the restaurant they read about, they did so at sooner dates than participants who read reviews highlighting more distant (hearing, sight) sensory experiences.
Also, study participants “were randomly assigned to read one of two advertisements: a proximal advertisement focused on the touch experience of [a] football, or a distal advertisement focused on the sound the football made when squeezed. Next, participants were randomly assigned to either view the football in person, by opening a box to the side of the computer [they were working on] (but not to touch or move the football inside), or to view a picture of the football online. . . . when the football was presented in-person, the proximal advertisement led to higher [more positive] attitudes [toward the football] than the distal advertisement [statistically significant effect]. However, when the football was presented online, the distal advertisement led to higher attitudes than the proximal advertisement [effect not statistically significant, but nearly so].” [Details and quotes in last two paragraphs are from R. Elder, M. Poor, L. Xu. 2014. “So Close I Can Almost Sense it: The Impact of Differences in Sensory Imagery Distance on Consumer Attitudes and Intentions.” NA-Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 42, available at http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/v42/acr_v42_17281.pdf.]
Ryan Elder, Ann Schlosser, Morgan Poor, and Lidan Xu. “So Close I Can Almost Sense It: The Interplay Between Sensory Imagery and Psychological Distance.” Journal of Consumer Research, in press.
Get Children Outdoors! (06-20-17)
Ulset and her research team investigated links between time spent outside and cognitive development. The team conducted a study in Norway that “examined the . . . relations between the amount of time children [average age when study began was 52 months] attending daycare spend outdoors [in naturalistic settings] and their cognitive and behavioral development during preschool and first grade. . . . analyses showed a positive relation between outdoor hours and [development of attention skills] and an inverse relation between outdoor hours and [inattention-hyperactivity symptoms]. . . . outdoor time in preschool may support children's development of attention skills and protect against inattention-hyperactivity symptoms. . . . the findings from this study suggest that high exposure to outdoor environments might be a cheap, accessible and environmentally friendly way of supporting and enhancing children’s self-regulatory capacities and cognitive development. . . . Nature is easily accessible even in urban areas. Large cities usually have parks and vegetation. Placing daycare centers near parks enables daily trips to green environments.”
Vidar Ulset, Frank Vitaro, Mara Brendgen, Mona Bekkhus, and Anne Borge. 2017. “Time Spent Outdoors During Preschool: Links with Children’s Cognitive and Behavioral Development.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 52, pp. 69-80.
Experience Sampling App (06-16-17)
Many researchers use experience sampling to collect information about user experiences in existing spaces as those experiences unfold. More specifically, experience sampling “is used to ‘sample’ from participant ‘experiences’ by asking them [the participants] to complete short surveys throughout the day.” A new app, available at http://www.experiencesampler.com, can streamline experience sampling. As Thai and Page-Gould state, “existing experience sampling methods may be costly, require constant Internet connectivity, may not be designed specifically for experience sampling studies, or require a custom solution from a computer programming consultant. . . . we present ExperienceSampler, an open-source scaffold for creating experience-sampling smartphone apps designed for Android and iOS devices. We designed ExperienceSampler to address the common barriers to using experience sampling methods. First, there is no cost to the user. Second, ExperienceSampler apps make use of local notifications to let participants know when to complete surveys and store the data locally until Internet connection is available. Third, our app scaffold was designed with experience sampling methodological issues in mind. . . . researchers can easily customize ExperienceSampler even if they have no programming skills.”
Sabrina Thai and Elizabeth Page-Gould. “ExperienceSampler: An Open-Source Scaffold for Building Smartphone Apps for Experience Sampling.” Psychological Methods, in press.
Like the blog posts you’re reading? Get access to Research Design Connections’ in depth research-based reviews of important design-related topics—and library of over 2,400 past articles on everything from aesthetics to zoo design—by subscribing ($99/yr.) to our monthly magazine at https://researchdesignconnections.com/product/rdc-subscription