Sitting Comfort of Ergonomic Office Chairs—Developed Versus Intuitive Evaluation

• Autorzy: Mueller G. F. , Hassenzahl M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The sitting comfort of office chairs with different ergonomic layouts (inferior, superior) was examined. Fifty participants were randomly assigned to a 2 × 5 factorial experimental design with 2 different conditions of ergonomic chair layout (inferior or superior) and 5 different conditions of instruction to explore the chair. Four conditions were created to differentiate between various levels of perceptual awareness and processing of chair-related information (guided exploration and developed evaluation). In a 5th condition, participants remained uninstructed (free exploration and intuitive exploration). Under guided exploration, the participants’ perception of sitting comfort was in line with objective differences in the chair layout. Different conditions of guided exploration, however, did not influence the evaluations. Under free exploration, the participants’ perceptions did not match the ergonomic chair layout. In contrast to participants under guided exploration, they even rated the ergonomically inferior office chair more favourably than the ergonomically superior chair.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

sitting comfort; office chair; ergonomic chair layout; developed evaluation; intuitive evaluation; sensory awareness

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: Vol. 16, No. 3
• Strony: 369--374
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 18 poz., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Mueller G. F.

• University of Koblenz-Landau at Landau, Germany

autor

Hassenzahl M.

• Folkwang University Essen, Germany

Bibliografia

• 1.Muller GF. Sitzkomfort—Die Messung subjektiver Urteile uber ergonomisch gestaltete Buroarbeitsstuhle [Sitting comfort—measuring subjective evaluations of ergonomical office chairs]. Zentralblatt fur Arbeitsmedizin und Arbeitsschutz. 1994;44:270–6.
• 2.Legg SJ, Mackie HW, Millicich W. Evaluation of a prototype multi-posture office chair. Ergonomics. 2002;45:153–63.
• 3.Looze de MP, Kuijt-Evers LFM, van Dieen J. Sitting comfort and discomfort and the relationships with objective measures. Ergonomics. 2003;46:985–97.
• 4.Muller GF, Nachreiner F. Ergonomie von Buroarbeitsstühlen im Urteil von Benutzern [Ergonomics of office chairs]. Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft. 1991;445:99–105.
• 5.Muller GF, Nachreiner F. Der Buroarbeitsstuhl im subjektiven Urteil [The office chair in a subjective perspective]. Zeitschrift fur Arbeitswissenschaft. 1994; 448:113–8.
• 6.Muller GF. Sinnesdominanz bei der Beurteilung ergonomisch gestalteter Burodrehsessel [Sensory dominance and evaluation of ergonomical office chairs]. Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie. 1992;36:177–83.
• 7.Muller GF. Personenspezifische Entscheidungspraferenzen und subjektive Urteile uber ergonomische Büroarbeitsstuhle [Person-specific decision preferences and subjective evaluations of ergonomical office chairs]. ABOaktuell. 1996;3:7–11.
• 8.Corlett EN. Background to sitting at work: research-based requirements for the design of work seats. Ergonomics. 2006;14:1538–46.
• 9.Ebe K, Griffin MJ. Qualitative models of seat discomfort including static and dynamic factors. Ergonomics. 2000; 43:771–90.
• 10.Ziefle M. Sitting posture, postural discomfort, and visual performance: a critical view on the interdependence of cognitive and anthropometric factors in the VDU workplace. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9:495–506.
• 11.Shiffrin RM, Schneider W. Automatic and controlled processing revisited. Psychol Rev. 1984;91:269–76.
• 12.Yeung CWM, Wyer RS Jr. Affect, appraisal and consumer judgment. J Consum Res. 2004;31:412–24.
• 13.Tophoff M. Mindfulness-training: exploring personal change through sensory awareness. Constructivism in the Human Sciences. 2004;9:43–52.
• 14.Stevens J. Intermediate statistics. A modern approach. Mahvah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum; 1999.
• 15.Lindgaard G, Fernandes G, Dudek C, Brown J. Attention web designers: you have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression. Behav Inf Technol. 2006;25:115–26.
• 16.Hassenzahl M. Aesthetics in interactive products: Correlates and consequences of beauty. In: Schifferstein HNJ, Hekkert P, editors. Product experience. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2008. p. 287–302.
• 17.Lowe R, Laeng-Gilliat S. Reclaiming vitality and presence. Berkeley, CA, USA: North Atlantic Books; 2007.
• 18.Muller GF. CHECK-BS—Diagnose- und Bewertungsleitfaden fur Buroarbeitsstuhle [CKECK-BS—Manual for the diagnosis and evaluation of office chairs] [unpublished technical report]. Landau, Germany: University of Koblenz-Landau at Landau, Psychology of Social and Work Behavior Unit; 2008.