Citation

Santamaria JG, Bennett CA. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 1980; 24(1): 228-232.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1980, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/107118138002400162

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

An experimental booth was constructed wherein north daylight or cool white fluorescent from either the side or top could be provided with the artificial horizontal illuminance matched to the daylight illuminance (at 320 to 860 lx). Thirty college student subjects performed needle threading, proofreading and graphreading tasks without awareness of the type of light source. Semantic scales were also used to assess aesthetic reactions to the lighting treatments. Speed of performance was very little affected by lighting type although a few small differences favored daylighting and sidelighting. Under these experimental conditions aesthetic variations were also small. It was concluded: For common visual tasks and workplaces if extraneous effects are controlled, there seems to be little if any advantage of daylighting over artificial lighting.

Language: en