{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/45051"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/45051","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"An evaluation of sensory comfort components of survey questionnaires used for indoor environment problems in buildings","abstract":"The efficacy of indoor environment evaluation is, in part, a function of the reliability and validity of the different measures used. This thesis presents results of a study, conducted in a building without known problems, which compares the reliability and validity of sensory comfort components from three well-known survey questionnaires. A review of literature reveals that sensory comfort theory draws upon many disciplines including, hedonics, psychometrics, and olfaction theory. The fundamental domains thermal, air quality, lighting, and acoustics and their dimensions are identified. The conceptual model integrates these theories underlying human response to sensory comfort. The research questions involved in the selection of survey questionnaires are explored by examining sixteen indoor environment survey questionnaires. A meta-evaluation reveals that these questionnaires have three major functions, proactive, reactive, and re-evaluative studies. Finally, the methods used to analyze survey questionnaires for reliability and validity are examined. An analysis of variance shows that the order in which questions were presented did not affect responses. The reliability of the measures tested ranged from poor to good. Examination of content and face validity by expert and untrained judges demonstrates inconsistencies in common or accepted meanings of the measures considered in evaluating the indoor environment. Analysis of construct validity indicates that not all survey questionnaire variables were categorized under their expected dimensions. Contrary to advice found in the literature, this thesis suggests that the practice of combining items from different questionnaires is problematic. Finally, in buildings with known problems we can expect a relatively high degree of reliability and validity. However, the utility of such questionnaires in inventorying and assessing buildings without known problems will prove to be questionable.","abstract_html":"The efficacy of indoor environment evaluation is, in part, a function of the reliability and validity of the different measures used. This thesis presents results of a study, conducted in a building without known problems, which compares the reliability and validity of sensory comfort components from three well-known survey questionnaires. A review of literature reveals that sensory comfort theory draws upon many disciplines including, hedonics, psychometrics, and olfaction theory. The fundamental domains thermal, air quality, lighting, and acoustics and their dimensions are identified. The conceptual model integrates these theories underlying human response to sensory comfort. The research questions involved in the selection of survey questionnaires are explored by examining sixteen indoor environment survey questionnaires. A meta-evaluation reveals that these questionnaires have three major functions, proactive, reactive, and re-evaluative studies. Finally, the methods used to analyze survey questionnaires for reliability and validity are examined. An analysis of variance shows that the order in which questions were presented did not affect responses. The reliability of the measures tested ranged from poor to good. Examination of content and face validity by expert and untrained judges demonstrates inconsistencies in common or accepted meanings of the measures considered in evaluating the indoor environment. Analysis of construct validity indicates that not all survey questionnaire variables were categorized under their expected dimensions. Contrary to advice found in the literature, this thesis suggests that the practice of combining items from different questionnaires is problematic. Finally, in buildings with known problems we can expect a relatively high degree of reliability and validity. However, the utility of such questionnaires in inventorying and assessing buildings without known problems will prove to be questionable.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Hart-Schubert, Patrice"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Urban and Regional Planning","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Urban and Regional Planning","degree_department":"Urban and Regional Planning","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Edwards, Patricia K."],"committee_members":["Bohland, James R.","Woods, James E."],"year":1994,"date_issued":"1994-03-18","date_published":"1994-03-18","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:18Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-10072005-094817"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-10072005-094817","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/45051","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Edwards, Patricia K."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Bohland, James R.","Woods, James E."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Urban and Regional Planning"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Hart-Schubert, Patrice"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T21:47:01Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T21:47:01Z","2005-10-07"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1994-03-18"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.dcmitype","label":"Dc Type Dcmitype","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Urban and Regional Planning"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Urban and Regional Planning"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-10072005-094817"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/45051"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The efficacy of indoor environment evaluation is, in part, a function of the reliability and validity of the different measures used. This thesis presents results of a study, conducted in a building without known problems, which compares the reliability and validity of sensory comfort components from three well-known survey questionnaires. A review of literature reveals that sensory comfort theory draws upon many disciplines including, hedonics, psychometrics, and olfaction theory. The fundamental domains thermal, air quality, lighting, and acoustics and their dimensions are identified. The conceptual model integrates these theories underlying human response to sensory comfort. The research questions involved in the selection of survey questionnaires are explored by examining sixteen indoor environment survey questionnaires. A meta-evaluation reveals that these questionnaires have three major functions, proactive, reactive, and re-evaluative studies. Finally, the methods used to analyze survey questionnaires for reliability and validity are examined. An analysis of variance shows that the order in which questions were presented did not affect responses. The reliability of the measures tested ranged from poor to good. Examination of content and face validity by expert and untrained judges demonstrates inconsistencies in common or accepted meanings of the measures considered in evaluating the indoor environment. Analysis of construct validity indicates that not all survey questionnaire variables were categorized under their expected dimensions. Contrary to advice found in the literature, this thesis suggests that the practice of combining items from different questionnaires is problematic. Finally, in buildings with known problems we can expect a relatively high degree of reliability and validity. However, the utility of such questionnaires in inventorying and assessing buildings without known problems will prove to be questionable."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Urban and Regional Planning"]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["BTD"]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["An evaluation of sensory comfort components of survey questionnaires used for indoor environment problems in buildings"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Edwards, Patricia K."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Bohland, James R.","Woods, James E."],"dc:contributor.department":["Urban and Regional Planning"],"dc:creator":["Hart-Schubert, Patrice"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T21:47:01Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T21:47:01Z","2005-10-07"],"dc:date.issued":["1994-03-18"],"dc:description.abstract":["The efficacy of indoor environment evaluation is, in part, a function of the reliability and validity of the different measures used. This thesis presents results of a study, conducted in a building without known problems, which compares the reliability and validity of sensory comfort components from three well-known survey questionnaires. A review of literature reveals that sensory comfort theory draws upon many disciplines including, hedonics, psychometrics, and olfaction theory. The fundamental domains thermal, air quality, lighting, and acoustics and their dimensions are identified. The conceptual model integrates these theories underlying human response to sensory comfort. The research questions involved in the selection of survey questionnaires are explored by examining sixteen indoor environment survey questionnaires. A meta-evaluation reveals that these questionnaires have three major functions, proactive, reactive, and re-evaluative studies. Finally, the methods used to analyze survey questionnaires for reliability and validity are examined. An analysis of variance shows that the order in which questions were presented did not affect responses. The reliability of the measures tested ranged from poor to good. Examination of content and face validity by expert and untrained judges demonstrates inconsistencies in common or accepted meanings of the measures considered in evaluating the indoor environment. Analysis of construct validity indicates that not all survey questionnaire variables were categorized under their expected dimensions. Contrary to advice found in the literature, this thesis suggests that the practice of combining items from different questionnaires is problematic. Finally, in buildings with known problems we can expect a relatively high degree of reliability and validity. However, the utility of such questionnaires in inventorying and assessing buildings without known problems will prove to be questionable."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Urban and Regional Planning"],"dc:format.medium":["BTD"],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-10072005-094817"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/45051"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["An evaluation of sensory comfort components of survey questionnaires used for indoor environment problems in buildings"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.dcmitype":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Urban and Regional Planning"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Urban and Regional Planning"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:18Z"}