Perceptual and Behavioral Determinants for Optimizing Energy Performance in Buildings: A Study of Maladaptive Human Interactions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54878/y57n5f34Keywords:
Energy efficiency, Human interaction, Building performance, Passive behavior, Environmental perceptionAbstract
The persistent discrepancy between predicted and actual building energy performance has highlighted the need to better understand the role of occupants in shaping operational energy outcomes. While technological advances have significantly improved building efficiency, human behavior remains a critical yet often underestimated determinant of actual energy consumption. This study investigates the behavioral and environmental factors influencing lighting related energy use in office environments, with particular emphasis on environmental concern, flexibility of energy-control systems, and responsive occupant behavior. Drawing upon theories from environmental psychology, behavioral science, and architectural research, a mixed-method approach was adopted comprising naturalistic observations, structured behavioral observations, and a survey-based investigation. Fieldwork was conducted within contemporary office environments. Following exploratory observations across multiple workplaces, a case-study office building was selected for detailed investigation. The study involved 77 participants representing a range of professional roles, including administrators, engineers, programmers, and researchers. The findings indicate that environmental concern alone does not adequately explain adaptive energy related behavior. Instead, occupants’ responses emerge through the interaction of personal values, environmental opportunities, spatial perception, and the accessibility of environmental control systems. Flexible lighting-control mechanisms, including adjustable blinds and decentralized lighting controls, were found to encourage greater engagement with daylight and more responsive lighting-related actions. Conversely, social dynamics, workplace norms, and limited environmental control frequently constrained adaptive behavior despite occupants’ awareness of energy-saving opportunities. The study argues that occupants should be regarded as active participants in building performance rather than unpredictable sources of variation. The results demonstrate that improving building energy performance requires an integrated human-centered approach in which architectural design, environmental affordances, and behavioral determinants are considered alongside technological efficiency measures. By supporting environmental awareness, user autonomy, and adaptive interaction, buildings can more effectively reduce the performance gap and achieve long-term sustainability objectives.
References
Abrahamse, W. (2005). ‘A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation’. *Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25*(3), pp. 273–291.
Ajzen, I. (1991). ‘The theory of planned behavior’. *Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50*(2), pp. 179–211.
Albarracín, D., Johnson, B. T., and Zanna, M. P. (2005). ‘Attitudes: Introduction and scope’. In Albarracín, D., Johnson, B. T., and Zanna, M. P. (eds.), *The Handbook of Attitudes*. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 3–19.
Berenguer, J. (2007). ‘The effect of empathy on pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors’. *Environment and Behavior, 39*(2), pp. 269–283.
Collins, C. M., Steg, L., and Koning, M. A. S. (2007). ‘Customer values, beliefs on sustainable corporate performance, and buying behavior’. *Psychology & Marketing, 24*(6), pp. 555–577.
Coral, M. (2011). *Environmental Motives Scale (EMS): Development and validation*. [Research report].
De Groot, J. I. M., and Steg, L. (2008). ‘Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmentally significant behavior: How to measure egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations’. *Environment and Behavior, 40*(3), pp. 330–354.
DuNann Winter, D., and Koger, S. M. (2004). *The Psychology of Environmental Problems*. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dunlap, R. E., and Jones, R. E. (2002). ‘Environmental concern: Conceptual and measurement issues’. In Dunlap, R. E., and Michelson, W. (eds.), *Handbook of Environmental Sociology*. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, pp. 482–524.
Dunlap, R. E., and Van Liere, K. D. (1978). ‘The New Environmental Paradigm: A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results’. *Journal of Environmental Education, 9*(4), pp. 10–19.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., and Jones, R. E. (2000). ‘New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP): A revised NEP scale’. *Journal of Social Issues, 56*(3), pp. 425–442.
Fabrigar, L. R., MacDonald, T. K., and Wegener, D. T. (2005). ‘The structure of attitudes’. In Albarracín, D., Johnson, B. T., and Zanna, M. P. (eds.), *The Handbook of Attitudes*. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 79–124.
Flynn, J. E., Spencer, T. J., Martyniuk, O., and Hendrick, C. (1973). ‘Interim study of procedures for investigating the effect of light on impressions and behavior’. *Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society, 3*(1), pp. 87–94.
Gatersleben, B., Steg, L., and Vlek, C. (2002). ‘Measurement and determinants of environmentally significant consumer behavior’. *Environment and Behavior, 34*(3), pp. 335–362.
Gifford, R., and Nilsson, A. (2014). ‘Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behavior: A review’. *International Journal of Psychology, 49*(3), pp. 141–157.
Harland, P., Staats, H., and Wilke, H. A. M. (1999). ‘Explaining pro-environmental intention and behavior by personal norms and the theory of planned behavior’. *Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29*(12), pp. 2505–2528.
Hayes, S. C., and Cone, J. D. (1981). ‘Reduction of residential consumption of electricity through simple monthly feedback’. *Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14*(1), pp. 81–88.
Kalof, L. (1993). ‘Social values and environmentalism: A gender, race and class analysis’. *Environment and Behavior, 25*(2), pp. 322–348.
Karp, D. G. (1996). ‘Values and their effect on pro-environmental behavior’. *Environment and Behavior, 28*(1), pp. 111–133.
Krosnick, J. A., Judd, C. M., and Wittenbrink, B. (2005). ‘The measurement of attitudes’. In Albarracín, D., Johnson, B. T., and Zanna, M. P. (eds.), *The Handbook of Attitudes*. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 21–76.
Krumpal, I. (2013). ‘Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: A literature review’. *Quality & Quantity, 47*(4), pp. 2025–2047.
Maloney, M. P., and Ward, M. P. (1973). ‘Ecology: Let’s hear from the people—An objective scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge’. *American Psychologist, 28*(7), pp. 583–586.
McDougall, G. H. G., Claxton, J. D., and Ritchie, J. R. B. (1982–1983). ‘Residential home audits: An empirical analysis of the ENERSAVE program’. *Journal of Environmental Systems, 12*(3), pp. 265–278.
Moore, T., Carter, D. J., and Slater, A. I. (2002). ‘User attitudes toward occupant controlled office lighting’. *Lighting Research & Technology, 34*(3), pp. 207–219.
Nolan, J. M., and Schultz, P. W. (2014). ‘Prosocial behavior and environmental action’. In Schroeder, D. A., and Graziano, W. G. (eds.), *The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior*. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 626–652.
Nordlund, A. M., and Garvill, J. (2003). ‘Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use’. *Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23*(4), pp. 339–347.
O’Brien, W., and Gunay, H. B. (2014). ‘The contextual factors contributing to occupants’ adaptive comfort behaviors in offices—A review and proposed modeling framework’. *Building and Environment, 77*, pp. 77–87.
Pothitou, M., Kolios, A. J., Varga, L., and Gu, S. (2016). ‘A framework for targeting household energy savings through behavior change’. *International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 35*(7), pp. 701–715.
Schultz, P. W., and Zelezny, L. (2003). ‘Reframing environmental messages to be congruent with American values’. *Human Ecology Review, 10*(2), pp. 126–136.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). ‘Normative influences on altruism’. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), *Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10*, pp. 221–279.
Schwartz, S. H. (2012). ‘An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values’. *Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2*(1), pp. 1–20.
Schwartz, S. H., and Bilsky, W. (1987). ‘Toward a universal psychological structure of human values’. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53*(3), pp. 550–562.
Schwartz, S. H., and Bilsky, W. (1990). ‘Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values’. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58*(5), pp. 878–891.
Seligman, C., and Darley, J. M. (1977). ‘Feedback as a means of decreasing residential energy consumption’. *Journal of Applied Psychology, 62*(4), pp. 363–368.
Sexton, R. J., Johnson, N. B., and Konakayama, A. (1987). ‘Consumer response to continuous-display electricity-use monitors in a time-of-use pricing experiment’. *Journal of Consumer Research, 14*(1), pp. 55–62.
Staats, H. J., Wit, A. P., and Midden, C. Y. H. (1996). ‘Communicating the greenhouse effect to the public: Evaluation of a mass media campaign from a social dilemma perspective’. *Journal of Environmental Management, 45*(3), pp. 189–203.
Steg, L. (2003). ‘Factors influencing the acceptability and effectiveness of transport pricing’. In Schade, J., and Schlag, B. (eds.), *Acceptability of Transport Pricing Strategies*. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 187–202.
Steg, L., and Vlek, C. (2009). ‘Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review and research agenda’. *Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29*(3), pp. 309–317.
Stern, P. C. (2000). ‘Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior’. *Journal of Social Issues, 56*(3), pp. 407–424.
