Irrelevant speech and indoor lighting: effects on cognitive performance and self‐reported affect

98 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Pleasure, Arousal, Dominance: Mehrabian and Russell revisited (2014, background): “Figure 2 shows a diagram that is often used to valuing the physical environment by the dimensions pleasure and arousal (Russell 1979, 1980; Mano 1992; Barrett and Russell 1998; Knez and Hygge 2002).”
Effects of the Physical Environment on Cognitive Load and Learning: Towards a New Model of Cognitive Load (2014, background): “Several studies have shown that the color temperature of the lamps (e.g., warm-white vs. cool-white) and the level of luminance (e.g., 300 vs. 1,500 Lx) have an impact on cognitive performance (e.g., Hygge and Knez 2001; Knez and Hygge 2002).”
The Impact of School Environments : A literature review Produced for the Design Council (2005, background): “A related suggestion is that, in general, impairment in performance is partly explained by the interference of any noise with inner speech (Poulton, 1978), while Knez and Hygge (2002) found that irrelevant speech is a particularly distracting noise.”
A sound foundation? What we know about the impact of environments on learning and the implications for Building Schools for the Future (2007, background): “However, there can be problems of subjective responses failing to match up with objective measures (Salame & Wittersheim, 1978; Knez & Hygge, 2002; Evans & Stecker, 2004).”