Auditory distraction in open-plan office environments: The effect of multi-talker acoustics

Yadav, Manuj; Kim, Jungsoo; Cabrera, Densil; Dear, Richard de

doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2017.05.011

Cited by 33 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Aliabadi et al, 2016) and lately noise-cancelling technologies (e.g. Yadav et al, 2017), but ignores how office use (coping) can influence productivity. To reduce the negative effects of noise, individuals can cope with noise by various types of coping strategies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping strategies and perceived productivity in open-plan offices with noise problems

Appel‐Meulenbroek

Steps²,

Wenmaekers

et al. 2020

JMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo study effects of different sources of noise in office environments on perceived productivity, how different types of employees cope with different noise sources, and the perceived effect of different coping strategies on individual productivity.Design/methodology/approachData on coping behavior and noise perception was collected through a survey among 150 employees of 3 organizations with an office in the Netherlands. These were analyzed with X2-tests and the lift-ratio.FindingsWhen coping with noise, people are most inclined to either “Make even a greater effort” or “Discuss the noise problem with colleagues,” despite the expectation that this does not have a major positive effect on their productivity. Overall, approach coping strategies were chosen less often than the avoidance coping strategies. There are clear preferences for specific coping strategies when exposed to specific noise sources. Personal differences did not appear to relate to the perception of noise sources but did show differences in coping behavior as well.Originality/valueThis study adds insights about preferred coping strategies for specific noise sources, differences in these preferences related to specific personal characteristics, and how successful these strategies are perceived to be with regard to support of individual productivity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping strategies and perceived productivity in open-plan offices with noise problems

Appel‐Meulenbroek

Steps²,

Wenmaekers

et al. 2020

JMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beginning with Taylor (1911), early theoretical approaches to the physical work environment have taken a practical view, examining instrumental features such as layout, privacy, lighting or spatial efficiency (Davis, 1984;Elsbach & Pratt, 2007. An extensive stream of research on disparate dimensions of the physical environment followed with a focus on spatial layout (Backhouse and Drew, 1992;Brennan et al, 2002;Zalesney and Farace, 1987), building materials (McCoy and Evans, 2002), decorations (Bringslimark et al, 2009), noise (Yadav, Kim, Cabrera, and de Dear, 2017;Zaglauer, Drotleff, and Lieble, 2017), lighting (Zhong and House, 2012) and opportunities for personalization (Elsbach, 2004). Gagliardi (1990) notes that this focus on features and layouts that could be replicated across contexts meant that the reactions of the employee to the physical work environment, and their experience at work took a back seat until researchers began to take a more subjective view based on employees' experiences of work.…”

Section: Framework For the Physical Environment At Homementioning

confidence: 99%

Escaping the Cubicle

Sander

Rafferty

Jordan

2021

Handbook of Research on Remote Work and Worker Well-Being in the Post-Covid-19 Era

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A rise in contingent work, the increasing real estate costs for organizations, technological advances, and more recently, restrictions on movement emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in a sharp increase in the number of employees working from home. These have significant implications for individuals, organizations, and society. Yet the physical work environment within the home has received little attention from scholars. Research on traditional office settings indicates that the physical environment influences a range of well-being and performance outcomes, indicating a critical need for researchers to consider the impact of the physical work environment at home. To address this issue, the authors briefly summarize the effects of the physical work environment and review existing research on working from home. They then propose directions for future research and emerging methodologies to undertake this research. Finally, they detail the practical implications that these changes bring for individuals, organizations, and society.

show abstract

“…Beranek, 1957 andBeranek, 1960) (Banbury & Berry, 2005;Kaarlela-Tuomaala et al, 2009) to suggest that speech distraction and speech privacy are the key determinants of occupants' overall satisfaction with indoor environments, particularly in open-plan offices (Kim & de Dear, 2013). Current standards do not adequately address speech stimuli due to various assumptions and simplifications that deviate from real-world talker-listener office interactions (Haapakangas et al, 2017, Yadav et al, 2017. If speech distraction and privacy are to be considered in evaluations of indoor acoustic quality, then longitudinal sampling procedures during occupied hours will be necessary.…”

Section: Acousticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Continuous IEQ monitoring system: Performance specifications and thermal comfort classification

Parkinson

Dear

2019

Building and Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of buildings can be assessed in terms of the indoor air quality, thermal comfort, lighting quality, acoustic comfort afforded the occupants, collectively referred to as Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ). A major barrier to a more thoroughly representative audit of actual IEQ performance are the expense and complexity of the measurement instrumentation required. Rapid developments in sensor technology in recent years present the opportunity for continuous and pervasive IEQ monitoring to deliver truly representative characterisations of building performance at a modest cost. The last remaining obstacle to realising these developments seems to be a concern about instrument accuracy. In this paper we test the performance of a low-cost IEQ monitoring system (SAMBA) introduced in an earlier paper. Calibration data from 100 devices was analysed to calculate the standard error of the estimate as a measure of equipment accuracy. Those performance specifications were used in a Monte Carlo simulation based on measurements of thermal comfort parameters from 24 office buildings. Performance measures suggests the low-cost system, whilst not as accurate as laboratory equipment, is more than sufficient for building IEQ diagnostics and compliance assessments. Furthermore, the results of the Monte Carlo simulation show that continuous monitoring systems are better at characterising long-term performance than ad hoc measurement strategies using precision equipment. Low-cost pervasive monitoring

show abstract

Auditory distraction in open-plan office environments: The effect of multi-talker acoustics

Cited by 33 publications

References 62 publications

Coping strategies and perceived productivity in open-plan offices with noise problems

Coping strategies and perceived productivity in open-plan offices with noise problems

Escaping the Cubicle

Continuous IEQ monitoring system: Performance specifications and thermal comfort classification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About