• Aucun résultat trouvé

Effects of office environment on employee satisfaction: a new analysis

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "Effects of office environment on employee satisfaction: a new analysis"

Copied!
25
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

Table 1. The physical variables measured in the COPE and GreenPOE studies. Identical measures are on the same row and are highlighted by shading, and for consistency the variable name used in the COPE reports has been used. Non-identical, but conceptually similar variables are on neighbouring rows.

COPE GreenPOE

Name Description Name Description

PANELS_CAT 1=not fully enclosed by partial-height partitions 2=enclosed except entrance

ClosedWS 0=open-plan office

1=private office (full-height walls and door)

MINPH Minimum partition height, excl. open sides (m) MINPH Minimum partition height, excl. open sides (m)

SQRTAREA Square root of workstation area (m) SQRTAREA Square root of workstation area (m)

AIR_V_H Air velocity at head height (m/s) AIR_V_H Air velocity at head height (m/s)

RTD_H Air temperature at head height (°C) RTD_H Air temperature at head height (°C)

REL_HUMID Relative humidity (%) REL_HUMID Relative humidity (%)

DL_OUT Air diffuser location

FDCO2 Carbon dioxide concentration (ppm) FDCO2 Carbon dioxide concentration (ppm)

POLLUT Sum of 3 pollutants: carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons

and methane

PM2.5LN Logarithm of calculated mass of particles <=2.5 microns ( µg/m3)

VDT_CAT Luminaire reflections in VDT

1= low; 2=medium; 3=high

DGP Daylight glare probability (0-1)

LumAbMLN Logarithm of luminance above monitor (cd/m2)

CUBEDAYT Average illuminance on 6 faces of a cube (lux)

IllumBelow 0= Illuminance above recommended (300 lx) 1= Illuminance below recommended (300 lx)

EH2V Ratio of illuminance, cube top:ave. of 4 vertical sides

NO_DL_WI 0= no window

1= daylight only, within 4.6 m 2= daylight and window

Window 0= No window; 1= Window in workstation Window 0= No window; 1= Window in workstation

UNIFDAYT Max. desktop illuminance/ min. desktop illuminance

SII Speech Intelligibility Index (0-1) SII Speech Intelligibility Index (0-1)

AI Articulation Index (0-1)

SNA Signal-to-Noise ratio A-weighted (dBA)

LNOISEA A-weighted ambient sound level unit (dBA) LNOISEA A-weighted ambient sound level unit (dBA)

LOHI_DBA Difference between the A-weighted level of the low

frequency (dBA)

(2)

Table 2. Demographic data for the participants in the two studies, and for sub-samples of interest.

COPE (all) Green POE (all) Green POE (open-plan in conventional buildings) Green POE (open-plan in green buildings) Green POE (Green buildings) Green POE (Conventional buildings) N 779 230 69 70 112 118 Gender (%) Female 47.6 64.6 72.5 65.7 61.6 67.5 Male 51.5 35.4 27.5 34.3 38.4 32.5

Age (years) Mean (SD) 36.2 (10.6) 39.5 (11.3) 40.1 (10.7) 36.4 (12.3) 37.6 (12.0) 41.4 (10.4)

Job Category (%) Administrative 27.1 23.9 27.5 27.1 24.1 23.7

Technical 24.9 9.6 8.7 15.7 12.5 6.8

Professional 38.4 50.0 55.1 38.6 45.5 54.2

Management 8.6 15.7 8.7 18.6 17.9 13.6

Education (%) High School 11.6 8.7 8.7 11.4 9.8 23.7

Community college 15.1 8.7 10.1 12.9 9.8 6.8 University courses 14.6 10.0 5.8 12.9 10.7 54.2 Undergraduate degree 34.0 32.6 36.2 35.7 32.1 13.6 Graduate degree 22.7 39.1 39.1 27.1 37.5 23.7 2

(3)

Table 3. Basic workstation characteristics in the two studies, and for the sub-samples of interest.

COPE (all) Green POE (all) Green POE (open-plan in conventional buildings) Green POE (open-plan in green buildings) Green POE (Green buildings) Green POE (Conventional buildings) N 779 230 69 70 112 118 SQRTAREA (m) Mean (SD) 2.7 (0.6) 2.9 (0.7) 2.5 (0.5) 2.5 (0.5) 2.8 (0.6) 2.9 (0.7) Median 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.4 2.8 2.8 Min/Max 1.1/4.8 1.2/5.6 1.4/3.7 1.2/4.1 1.2/4.2 1.4/5.6 MINPH (m) Mean (SD) 1.5 (0.2) 2.0 (0.7) 1.6 (0.3) 1.5 (0.4) 2.0 (0.7) 2.0 (0.6) Median 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.7 Min/Max 0.8/2.8 0.7/3.5 0.7/3.0 0.7/3.0 0.7/3.5 0.7/3.0

Window availability No window 461 (59%) 110 (48%) 37 (54%) 38 (55%) 52 (46%) 58 (49%) In office 318 (41%) 120 (52%) 32 (46%) 32 (45%) 60 (54%) 60 (51%)

(4)

Table 4. Descriptive statistics for the measured physical variables common in the two studies, and for the sub-samples of interest.

COPE (all) Green POE (all) Green POE (open-plan in conventional buildings) Green POE (open-plan in green buildings) Green POE (Green buildings) Green POE (Conventional buildings) AIR_V_H (m/s) N 779 228 69 68 110 118 Mean (SD) 0.10 (0.05) 0.12 (0.07) 0.13 (0.06) 0.12 (0.09) 0.12 (0.08) 0.12 (0.06) Median 0.08 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.12 Min/Max 0.01/0.43 0.02/0.68 0.03/0.37 0.02/0.67 0.02/0.68 0.03/0.37 RTD_H (oC) N 779 228 69 68 110 118 Mean (SD) 23.3 (1.0) 23.0 (1.1) 23.0 (1.3) 23.3 (0.66) 23.1 (0.9) 23.0 (1.3) Median 23.3 23.1 23.3 23.3 23.2 23.0 Min/Max 20.4/28.7 18.9/27.4 18.9/25.9 21.3/25.0 19.8/25.1 18.9/27.4 REL_HUMID (%) N 779 228 69 68 110 118 Mean (SD) 30 (11) 35 (10) 33 (9) 39.0 (11.1) 37.0 (10) 33.6 (8.7) Median 29 33 30 41.3 37.2 30.8 Min/Max 13/59 22/56 22/56 22.1/55.1 22.1/55.1 21.5/56.4 FDCO2 (ppm) N 779 228 69 68 110 118 Mean (SD) 648 (97) 624 (120) 645 (126) 651 (124) 625 (127) 622 (114) Median 640 604 619 662 593 610 Min/Max 470/1104 395/1039 464/1039 408/868 408/910 395/1039 CUBEDAYT (lux) N 779 228 69 68 110 118 Mean (SD) 262 (252) 460 (732) 344 (246) 462 (406) 444 (527) 474 (884) Median 203 297 254 292 313 256 Min/Max 9/3655 45/7958 45/1492 73/3896 74/3897 45/7958 SII N 734 230 69 70 112 118 Mean (SD) 0.51 (0.15) 0.34 (0.20) 0.45 (0.16) 0.42 (0.19) 0.33 (0.21) 0.35 (0.20) Median 0.51 0.33 0.42 0.44 0.32 0.34 Min/Max 0.00/0.91 0.01/0.90 0.06/0.87 0.01/0.89 0.01/0.90 0.04/0.87 LNOISEA (dBA) N 734 230 69 70 112 118 Mean (SD) 46.4 (3.8) 42.3 (5.3) 42.9 (3.8) 44.8 (6.1) 42.7 (6.1) 41.9(4.4) Median 46.7 42.1 42.7 45.1 41.9 42.2 Min/Max 36.2/59.9 31.5/65.1 33.4/52.7 32.2/65.1 31.5/65.1 33.4/52.7 4

(5)

Table 5. Descriptive statistics for the dependent variables common in the two studies, and for the sub-samples of interest.

COPE (all) Green POE (all) Green POE (open-plan in conventional buildings) Green POE (open-plan in green buildings) Green POE (Green buildings) Green POE (Conventional buildings) SAT_AP N 775 230 69 70 112 118 Mean (SD) 3.88 (1.12) 4.39 (1.30) 3.65 (1.34) 4.33 (1.19) 4.60 (1.20) 4.21 (1.37) Median 3.90 4.55 3.70 4.50 4.90 4.20 Min/Max 1.00/6.70 1.00/6.90 1.00/6.50 1.60/7.0 1.60/6.90 1.00/6.90 SAT_L N 775 229 69 70 112 117 Mean (SD) 4.75 (1.20) 5.32 (1.09) 5.04 (1.07) 5.54 (1.14) 5.55 (1.09) 5.09 (1.06) Median 5.00 5.60 5.20 5.80 5.80 5.20 Min/Max 1.40/7.00 1.20/7.00 2.40/6.80 1.20/7.0 1.20/7.00 1.80/6.80 SAT_VT N 776 230 69 70 112 118 Mean (SD) 4.25 (1.41) 4.22 (1.51) 4.07 (1.51) 4.81 (1.18) 4.66 (1.38) 3.79 (1.52) Median 4.33 4.33 4.00 5.0 5.00 3.67 Min/Max 1.00/7.00 1.00/7.00 1.00/7.00 2.33/7.0 1.00/7.00 1.00/7.00 OES N 745 230 69 70 112 118 Mean (SD) 4.05 (1.31) 4.28 (1.49) 3.58 (1.52) 4.47 (1.27) 4.60 (1.34) 3.97 (1.57) Median 4.00 4.50 3.50 4.75 5.00 4.00 Min/Max 1.00/7.00 1.00/7.00 1.00/7.00 1.50/7.0 1.50/7.00 1.00/7.00 Job SAT N 775 228 69 69 111 117 Mean (SD) 4.75 (1.20) 5.59 (1.18) 5.17 (1.25) 5.70 (1.10) 5.70 (1.10) 5.49 (1.25) Median 5.00 6.0 5.00 6.0 6.00 6.00 Min/Max 1.40/7.00 2.00/7.00 2.00/7.00 3.0/7.0 2.00/7.00 2.00/7.00 5

(6)

Table 6a. SAT_AP regression with COPE data (Veitch et al., 2003). Column headings labelledβ in this and subsequent tables show standardized regression coefficients.

β β β β β AGE -.111** -.135*** -.128*** -.126** -.128*** GENDER (F=0, M=1) .072 .063 .065 .066 .065 ADMIN .152** .108* .103* .103 .102 MGR .032 .02 .015 .011 .01 PROF .067 .023 .028 .029 .031 SQRTAREA .175** .184** .194** .207*** MINPH .012 .002 .015 .017 PANELS_CAT -.023 -.047 -.036 -.022 WINDOW -.072 -.070 -.080 -.091* SII -.071 -.038 -.012 LNOISEA .046 .055 LOHI_DBA -.046 R2 Change .022** .022** .004 .001 .001 Total R2 .022** .044*** .048*** .049*** .050*** Adjusted R2 .015** .031*** .034*** .034*** .034*** Note. N=694 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 6

(7)

Table 6b. SAT_AP regression with GreenPOE data. Tolerance values shown for variables at final step. β β β β β Tolerance GENDER .196** .134* .133* .134* .125* .965 AGE -.070 -.127* -.127* -.124* -.102 .952 SQRTAREA .195* .186* .167 .187* .477 ClosedWS .246** .247** .206* .212* .451 Window .034 .045 .036 .916 SNA -.092 -.063 .646 GREEN .145* .939 R2 Change .045** .157*** .001 .006 .020* Total R2 .045** .202*** .203*** .209*** .228*** Adjusted R2 .036** .187*** .185*** .187*** .204*** Note. N=226 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 7

(8)

Table 7. Speech Noise Annoyance regression with GreenPOE data. Tolerance values shown for variables at final step. β β β β β Tolerance GENDER -.211 -.159 -.167 -.160 -.149 .933 AGE -.258* -.103 -.108 -.143 -.179 .770 SQRTAREA -.024 -.036 -.007 -.044 .407 ClosedWS -.530*** -.555*** -.485*** -.457** .384 Window .108 .093 .102 .860 AI .145 .141 .651 GREEN -.167 .922 R2 Change .126** .271*** .010 .014 .026 Total R2 .126** .398*** .408*** .422*** .448*** Adjusted R2 .104** .366*** .369*** .375*** .395*** Note. N=81 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 8

(9)

Table 8a. SAT_L regression with COPE data (Veitch et al., 2003). β β β β β β β AGE .027 .009 .009 .008 .014 .008 -.009 GENDER .045 .038 .032 .030 .030 .036 .037 ADMIN .083 .065 .063 .055 .063 .067 .082 MGR .037 .023 .022 .016 .017 .009 .002 PROF .000 -.012 -.015 -.026 -.027 -.028 -.011 SQRTAREA .170*** .177*** .127* .126* .122* .046 MINPH -.139** -.135** -.089 -.089 -.068 -.078 PANELS_CAT -.040 -.042 -.033 -.030 -.024 -.010 VDT_CAT -.093** -.080* -. -.092* -.101** -.104** CUBEDAYT .123** .119** .086* -.008 UNIFDAYT -.081* -.113** -.108** EH2V -.098* -.013 NO_DL_WI .281*** R2 Change .008 .017** .009** .013** .006* .007* .049*** Total R2 .008 .024* .033** .046*** .052*** .059*** .108*** Adjusted R2 .001 .014* .021** .033*** .038*** .044*** .092*** Note. N=740 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 9

(10)

Table 8b. SAT_L regression with GreenPOE data. Tolerance values shown for variables at final step. β β β β β β β Tolerance GENDER .077 .062 .059 .028 .032 .027 .022 .942 AGE -.070 -.074 -.066 -.057 -.055 -.059 -.032 .937 SQRTAREA .154 .077 .063 .044 .046 .063 .494 ClosedWS -.092 -.087 -.066 -.097 -.143 -.149 .486 Window .294*** .268*** .267*** .271*** .272*** .919 LumAbMLN .199** .116 .237** .214* .481 IllumBelow -.163* -.267** -.256** .510 DGP -.252* -.255* .389 GREEN .148* .902 R2 Change .011 .013 .081*** .038** .018* .025* .020* Total R2 .011 .024 .105*** .143*** .160*** .185*** .205*** Adjusted R2 .002 .006 .084*** .118*** .132*** .154*** .170*** Note. N=218 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 10

(11)

Table 9a. SAT_VT regression with COPE data (Veitch et al., 2003). β β β β β AGE -.050 -.012 -.021 -.021 -.012 GENDER .179*** .191*** .220*** .218*** .228*** ADMIN -.055 .003 -.023 -.023 -.023 MGR .022 .041 .018 .025 .006 PROF .005 .067 .055 .056 .062 SQRTAREA -.032 -.055 -.071 -.066 MINPH -.161*** -.182*** -.192*** -.168*** PANELS_CAT -.022 -.032 -.03 -.034 WINDOW -.096* -.108** -.111** -.119** AIR_V_H -.098** -.103** -.111** RTD_H -.144*** -.139*** -.121** REL_HUMID .052 .053 .096 DL_OUT -.057 -.062 FDCO2 -.124*** POLLUT -.047 R2 Change .046*** .049*** .029*** .003 .016** Total R2 .046*** .096*** .125*** .127*** .143*** Adjusted R2 .039*** .084*** .110*** .111*** .125*** Note. N=721 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 11

(12)

Table 9b. SAT_VT regression with GreenPOE data. Tolerance values shown for variables at final step. β β β β β Tolerance GENDER .173** .207** .210** .208*** .194** .967 AGE -.056 -.021 -.022 .005 .041 .934 SQRTAREA -.124 -.104 -.098 -.076 .497 ClosedWS -.124 -.126 -.083 -.111 .503 Window -.076 -.051 -.068 .917 PM2.5LN -.201** -.130 .826 GREEN .252*** .887 R2 Change .034* .049** .005*** .036** .056*** Total R2 .034* .083*** .089*** .125*** .181*** Adjusted R2 .025* .067*** .068*** .101*** .155*** Note. N=224 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 12

(13)

Table 10. OES regression with GreenPOE data. Tolerance values shown for variables at final step. β β β β β Tolerance GENDER .235*** .200*** .198** .176** .171** .945 AGE -.057 -.088 -.088 -.082 -.052 .947 SQRTAREA .149 .136 .128 .149 .495 ClosedWS .091 .092 .108 .094 .515 Window .051 .031 .029 .921 LumAbMLN .141* .100 .901 GREEN .189** .918 R2 Change .059*** .047** .002 .019* .033** Total R2 .059*** .107*** .109*** .128*** .160*** Adjusted R2 .051*** .090*** .089*** .104*** .133*** Note. N=225 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 13

(14)

Table 11a. JobSAT regression with COPE data (Veitch et al., 2003). β β β β β AGE -.132*** -.121** -.120** -.120** -.113** GENDER -.008 -.005 .002 .000 .007 ADMIN -.055 -.021 -.019 -.019 -.022 MGR .031 .033 .029 .037 .013 PROF -.021 .018 .016 .018 .024 SQRTAREA -.047 -.051 -.067 -.048 MINPH -.102* -.123* -.134* -.107* PANELS_CAT -.021 -.019 -.017 -.020 WINDOW .050 .048 .045 .030 AIR_V_H -.018 -.023 -.034 RTD_H -.024 -.019 -.002 REL_HUMID -.029 -.028 .054 DL_OUT -.062 -.061 FDCO2 -.121** POLLUT -.106* R2 Change .022** .019** .001 .003 .021*** Total R2 .022** .041*** .043** .046** .067*** Adjusted R2 .015** .029*** .026** .028** .046*** Note. N=703 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 14

(15)

Table 11b. JobSAT regression with GreenPOE data. Tolerance values shown for variables at final step. β β β β β Tolerance GENDER -.010 -.023 -.026 -.027 -.030 .966 AGE .031 .006 .007 .034 .040 .937 SQRTAREA -.061 -.089 -.084 -.080 .496 ClosedWS .211* .214* .257** .252* .503 Window .106 .132 .129 .917 PM2.5LN -.200** -.188* .825 GREEN .043 .888 R2 Change .001 .03* .011 .036** .002 Total R2 .001 .031 .042 .077** .079* Adjusted R2 -.008 .013 .019 .052** .049* Note. N=223 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 15

(16)

Table 12. Summary of important predictors, direction of association shown in parentheses. Consistent (COPE & GreenPOE) ClosedWS?

(GreenPOE)

Green buildings? (Green POE)

Satisfaction with Acoustics & Privacy (SAT_AP)

Workstation Size (+) Yes (+) Yes (+)

Satisfaction with Lighting (SAT_L)

Window (+)

Glare COPE: VDT_CAT (-)

GreenPOE: DGP (-) Yes (+) Satisfaction with Ventilation & Temperature (SAT_VT) Female (-)

Air Quality COPE: CO2 (-)

GreenPOE: PM2.5 (-) Yes (+) Overall Environmental Satisfaction (OES) Yes (+) Job Satisfaction (JobSAT)

Air Quality COPE: CO2 (-), POLLUT (-)

GreenPOE: PM2.5 (-)

Yes (+)

(17)

Table A1. Individual items in environmental features ratings, with associated subscale designation. Satisfaction with 18 specific aspects of the work environment were scored on a 7-point scale from 1 (very unsatisfactory) to 7 (very satisfactory). The subscale score was the mean of the items comprising it.

Question Subscale

Amount of lighting on your desktop Sat_L

Overall air quality in your work area Sat_VT

Temperature in your work area Sat_VT

Aesthetic appearance of your office Sat_AP

Level of privacy for conversations in your office Sat_AP

Level of visual privacy within your office Sat_AP

Amount of noise from other people's conversations while you are at your workstation Sat_AP Size of your personal workspace to accommodate your work, materials, and visitors Sat_AP Amount of background noise (i.e. not speech) you hear at your workstation Sat_AP

Amount of light for computer work Sat_L

Amount of reflected light or glare in the computer screen Sat_L

Air movement in your work area Sat_VT

Your ability to alter physical conditions in your work area Sat_AP

Your access to a view of outside from where you sit Sat_L

Distance between you and other people you work with Sat_AP

Quality of lighting in your work area Sat_L

Frequency of distractions from other people Sat_AP

Degree of enclosure of your work area by walls, screens or furniture Sat_AP

(18)

Table A2. Individual items comprising overall environmental satisfaction. The productivity item was scored on a 7-point scale from 1 (-30%) to 7 (+30%); the satisfaction item was scored on a 7-point scale from 1 (very unsatisfactory) to 7 (very satisfactory). The OES value was the mean of the two ratings.

Question Subscale

Please estimate how you think your personal productivity at work is increased or decreased by the environmental conditions at the moment, compared to what you normally achieve.

OES (COPE)

Please estimate how you think your personal productivity at work is increased or decreased by the physical environmental conditions.

OES

(Green POE) Considering all of the environmental conditions in your workstation, what is your

degree of satisfaction with the indoor environment in your workstation, as a whole?

OES

(19)

Table A3. Individual items comprising job satisfaction. The COPE satisfaction items were scored on a 7-point scale from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 7 (very strongly agree), and the JobSAT value was the mean of the two ratings. The GreenPOE item was scored on a 7-point scale from 1 (very unsatisfactory) to 7 (very satisfactory).

Question Subscale

Please think about your job in general, and your experiences working here … My department/agency is a good place to work.

JobSAT (COPE)

I am satisfied with my job. JobSAT

(COPE) Taking everything into consideration, what is your degree of satisfaction with your job

as a whole?

JobSAT (Green POE)

(20)

Table B1. Bivariate correlations for physical variables used as predictors in SAT_AP regression with GreenPOE data.

SQRTAREA ClosedWS Window SNA GREEN

SQRTAREA 1 ClosedWS .690*** 1 Window .244*** .152* 1 SNA -.472*** -.556*** .005 1 GREEN -.070 -.041 .027 -.084 1 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 20

(21)

Table B2. Bivariate correlations for physical variables used as predictors in Speech Noise Annoyance regression with GreenPOE data.

SQRTAREA ClosedWS Window AI GREEN

SQRTAREA 1 ClosedWS .690*** 1 Window .244*** .152* 1 AI -.501*** -.574*** .013 1 GREEN -.070 -.041 .027 -.038 1 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 21

(22)

Table B3. Bivariate correlations for physical variables used as predictors in SAT_L regression with GreenPOE data.

SQRTAREA ClosedWS Window LumAbM IllumBelow DGP GREEN

SQRTAREA 1 ClosedWS .690*** 1 Window .244*** .152* 1 LumAbMLN .044 -.016 .142* 1 IllumBelow -.266*** -.257*** -.135* -.506*** 1 DGP .010 -.086 .114 .704*** -.611*** 1 GREEN -.070 -.041 .027 .212*** -.143* .196** 1 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 22

(23)

Table B4. Bivariate correlations for physical variables used as predictors in SAT_VT regression with GreenPOE data.

SQRTAREA ClosedWS Window PM2.5LN GREEN

SQRTAREA 1 ClosedWS .690*** 1 Window .244*** .152* 1 PM2.5LN .218*** .274*** .171** 1 GREEN -.070 -.041 .027 -.281*** 1 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 23

(24)

Table B5. Bivariate correlations for physical variables used as predictors in OES regression with GreenPOE data.

SQRTAREA ClosedWS Window LumAbM GREEN

SQRTAREA 1 ClosedWS .690*** 1 Window .244*** .152* 1 LumAbMLN .044 -.016 .142* 1 GREEN -.070 -.041 .027 .212*** 1 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 24

(25)

Table B6. Bivariate correlations for physical variables used as predictors in JobSAT regression with GreenPOE data.

SQRTAREA ClosedWS Window PM2.5LN GREEN

SQRTAREA 1 ClosedWS .690*** 1 Window .244*** .152* 1 PM2.5LN .218*** .274*** .171** 1 GREEN -.070 -.041 .027 -.281*** 1 *p<=.05 **p<=.01 ***p<=.001 25

Figure

Table 1. The physical variables measured in the COPE and GreenPOE studies. Identical measures are on  the same row and are highlighted by shading, and for consistency the variable name used in the COPE  reports has been used
Table 2. Demographic data for the participants in the two studies, and for sub-samples of interest.
Table 3. Basic workstation characteristics in the two studies, and for the sub-samples of interest.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics for the measured physical variables common in the two studies, and for the sub-samples of interest.
+7

Références

Documents relatifs

The empirical probability to wrongly accept the hypothesis of nullity of public capital elasticity lies between 34% and 45%, given the value of a;g : Indeed, in one pseudo sample out

Since, the proposition above defined the input and output sub-vectors environmental disaggregated additive distance functions, we suggest some equivalences with the input and

– Presentation is a major step of your work?. – What are the

Because the 2021 Clinical Component is a remotely proctored exam, the candidate’s testing environment must demonstrate adequate privacy and security to allow a remote Proctor to

*IMPORTANT: If you are using a location that is not your private residence (e.g., hotel, clinic, office) it is your responsibility to confirm that the on-site network meets

• We compare through simulations the overhead obtained with the optimal strategy introduced in this work (restart strategy, optimal checkpointing pe- riod) to those used in all

Students’ satisfaction with the learning environment (course climate, course requirements, learning promotion, lecturers and teaching, and skill acquisition) was regressed by

Conclusion Dans ce chapitre, nous avons étudié l’impact des deux couches, CdS couche tampon, et CIGS couche absorbante sur le rendement d’une cellule solaire à base de diséléniure