Windowlessness in the Workplace

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
A series of studies was performed to explore the hypothesis that employees in windowless offices compensate for the lack of windows. In Experiment 1, students rated the degree to which they perceived various office features to be substitutes for windows. Analyses revealed four general categories of potential window substitutes: other apertures (e.g., skylights), paintings/art, living things (e.g., plants), and panels (e.g., light panels). Experiment 2 supported the external validity of the data in Experiment 1 in that full-time office workers produced virtually identical ratings of window substitutability. Experiment 3 was a field study of 173 offices. Measurements were made of the number and size of windows, number and size of all potential window substitutes, and size of wall space available for pictures. Size was measured in degrees of visual angle from the office workers' chairs. No evidence was obtained to indicate that any of the features measured were more prevalent or larger in offices without windows. Furthermore, power analyses indicated that the study had sufficient power to find such effects. Experiment 4 was designed to investigate other potential reasons for the use of the items that were examined in Experiment 3. Several reasons, such as space personalization, were found to be perceived by office occupants as more important than the desire to compensate for lack of windows.

This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit: