Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 11 results ...

Ballesteros-Pérez, P, Skitmore, M, Pellicer, E and González-Cruz, M C (2015) Scoring rules and abnormally low bids criteria in construction tenders: a taxonomic review. Construction Management and Economics, 33(04), 259-78.

Bordass, B and Leaman, A (2005) Making feedback and post-occupancy evaluation routine 1: A portfolio of feedback techniques. Building Research & Information, 33(04), 347–52.

Bordass, B and Leaman, A (2005) Making feedback and post-occupancy evaluation routine 3: Case studies of the use of techniques in the feedback portfolio. Building Research & Information, 33(04), 361–75.

Hamzeh, F R, Zankoul, E and Rouhana, C (2015) How can 'tasks made ready' during look-ahead planning impact reliable workflow and project duration?. Construction Management and Economics, 33(04), 243-58.

Herazo, B and Lizarralde, G (2015) The influence of green building certifications in collaboration and innovation processes. Construction Management and Economics, 33(04), 279-98.

Humphreys, M A (2005) Quantifying occupant comfort: are combined indices of the indoor environment practicable?. Building Research & Information, 33(04), 317–25.

Kaminsky, J (2015) The fourth pillar of infrastructure sustainability: tailoring civil infrastructure to social context. Construction Management and Economics, 33(04), 299-309.

Kampschroer, K and Heerwagen, J H (2005) The strategic workplace: development and evaluation. Building Research & Information, 33(04), 326–37.

Loosemore, M and Lim, B (2015) Inter-organizational unfairness in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 33(04), 310-26.

Nicol, F and Roaf, S (2005) Post-occupancy evaluation and field studies of thermal comfort. Building Research & Information, 33(04), 338–46.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: adaptive behaviour; building assessment; comfort; indoor environment; occupant perceptions; offices; post-occupancy evaluation; satisfaction; satisficing; sustainable development
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0961-3218
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210500161885
  • Abstract:
    The similarities and differences are explored in both the aims and the methods between post-occupancy evaluations and field studies of thermal comfort in buildings. The interpretations of the field study results are explored, especially the ways the results differ from laboratory experiments. Particular attention is drawn to the dynamic nature of the interaction between buildings and their occupants. Answers to questions of the type used in post-occupancy evaluations are compared with results from field studies of thermal comfort, and the implications of these findings for the evaluation of buildings and the conduct of post-occupancy evaluation are explored. Field studies of thermal comfort have shown that the way in which occupants evaluate the indoor thermal environment is context-dependent and varies with time. In using occupants as part of the means of measuring buildings, post-occupancy evaluations should be understood as reflecting the changing nature of the relationship between people, the climate and buildings. Surveys are therefore measuring a moving target, and close comparisons based on such surveys need to take this in to account.

Way, M and Bordass, B (2005) Making feedback and post-occupancy evaluation routine 2: Soft landings – involving design and building teams in improving performance. Building Research & Information, 33(04), 353–60.