Campanella, Carolina

Previous work has demonstrated the modest impact of environmental interventions that manipulate lighting, sound, or temperature on sleep inertia symptoms. The current study sought to expand on previous work and measure the impact of a multimodal intervention that collectively manipulated light, sound, and ambient temperature on sleep inertia. Participants slept in the lab for four nights and were awoken each morning by either a traditional alarm clock or the multimodal intervention. Feelings of sleep inertia were measured each morning through Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT) assessments and ratings of sleepiness and mood at five time-points. While there was little overall impact of the intervention, the participant’s chronotype and the length of the lighting exposure on intervention mornings both influenced sleep inertia symptoms. Moderate evening types who received a shorter lighting exposure (≤15 min) demonstrated more lapses relative to the control condition, whereas intermediate types exhibited a better response speed and fewer lapses. Conversely, moderate evening types who experienced a longer light exposure (>15 min) during the intervention exhibited fewer false alarms over time. The results suggest that the length of the environmental intervention may play a role in mitigating feelings of sleep inertia, particularly for groups who might exhibit stronger feelings of sleep inertia, including evening types.

Abstract Introduction Sleep inertia is a temporary period of reduced alertness and impaired physical and cognitive performance that immediately follows waking. Sleep inertia can have devastating consequences necessitating an intervention to successfully mitigate symptoms. Previous work has demonstrated modest benefits for individual environmental interventions which manipulate either lighting, sound, or temperature. The current study sought to expand on previous work and measure the impact of a multimodal intervention that collectively manipulated light, sound, and ambient temperature on vigilance, mood, and sleepiness. Methods 37 adults (M=27.13 years, 19 F) who self-reported taking longer than 30 minutes to wake up for 60% of their work week slept in the lab for four nights. They were woken up each morning with either a traditional alarm sound or the multimodal intervention (two control nights and two intervention nights, counterbalanced across participants). Feelings of sleep inertia were measured each morning through completion of the Psychomotor Vigilance Test and ratings of sleepiness and mood at five different time-points (5, 15, 30, 60, and 90 min after wake). Results While there was little impact of the intervention on all outcome measures, there were differential impacts depending on a person’s chronotype and the length of the lighting exposure during the intervention condition. Moderate evening-types who received a shorter lighting exposure (£15 min) demonstrated more vigilance lapses (p = 0.04) relative to the control condition whereas intermediate-types demonstrated better response speed (p < 0.005) and fewer lapses (p = 0.002). Conversely, moderate evening-types who experienced a longer light exposure (>15 min) during the intervention exhibited fewer false alarms over time (p = 0.03). Participants who received a longer light exposure also reported marginally lower negative affect the longer they were awake (p = 0.06). Conclusion Collectively, the results suggest that the length of the environmental intervention may play a role in mitigating feelings of sleep inertia, particularly for groups who may exhibit stronger feelings of sleep inertia including evening-types. Results may help inform the efficacy of “smart alarms” that activate based on entering light sleep. Future studies should measure this impact using additional measures of cognitive performance. Support (If Any)

As a critical factor in the built environment, lighting presents considerable influence on occupants. Previous research across static lighting conditions has found that both illuminance and correlated color temperature (CCT) affect occupants’ physiological and psychological functioning. However, little research has been conducted on the non-visual impacts of dynamic lighting with daily variation in illuminance and CCT levels. The purpose of this study is to better understand the impact of dynamic lighting on office occupants’ health, well-being and experience at a living lab. Fifteen participants were recruited to work in three office modules for four months. Four lighting conditions were designed and implemented in this study, including two static lighting conditions and two dynamic lighting conditions with a specific predefined control scheme. A prototype lighting system with enhanced control capabilities was configured and implemented to ensure the desired lighting environment protocol. Both objective methods and subjective surveys were used to assess the behavioral and physiological outcomes of interest, including mental stress, sleep, productivity, satisfaction, mood, visual comfort and perceived naturalness. The results showed that the daytime behavioral impacts were either positive or mixed. Specifically, a significant alertness increase was observed in the afternoon, indicating a potential solution to reduce the natural feelings of sleepiness during the workday. There was also a marginal benefit for mood. The nighttime impacts include a significant decrease in perceived sleep quality and sleep time after subjects were exposed to dynamic lighting. No significant differences were observed for mental stress, productivity, visual comfort, or perceived naturalness. The findings present additional insights into the non-visual impacts of dynamic lighting and give recommendations for further investigations.

The living lab approach to building science research provides the ability to accurately monitor occupants and their environment and use the resulting data to evaluate the impact that various components of the built environment have on human comfort, health, and well-being. A hypothesized benefit of the living lab approach is the ability to simulate the real indoor environment in an experimentally controlled setting over relatively long periods of time, overcoming a significant hurdle encountered in many chamber-type experimental designs that rarely reflect typical indoor environments. Here, we present indoor environmental quality measurements from a network of sensors as well as building system design and operational data demonstrating the ability of a living lab to realistically simulate a wide range of environmental conditions in an office setting by varying air temperature, lighting, façade control, and sound masking in a series of three human subject experiments. The temporal variability of thermal and lighting conditions was assessed on an hourly basis and demonstrated the significant impact of façade design and control on desk-level measurements of both factors. Additional factors, such as desk layout and building system design (e.g., luminaires, speaker system), also contributed significantly to spatial variability in air temperature, lighting, and sound masking exposures, and this variability was reduced in latter experiments by optimizing desk layout and building system design. While ecologically valid experimental conditions are possible with a living lab, a compromise between realism and consistency in participant experience must often be found by, for example, using an atypical desk layout to reduce spatial variability in natural light exposure. Based on the experiences from these three studies, experimental design and environmental monitoring considerations for future office-based living lab experiments are explored.