Evaluating Open and Conventional Office Design
dc.contributor.author | Marans, Robert | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Spreckelmeyer, Kent | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-04-13T19:20:12Z | |
dc.date.available | 2010-04-13T19:20:12Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1982 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Marans, Robert; Spreckelmeyer, Kent (1982). "Evaluating Open and Conventional Office Design." Environment and Behavior 3(14): 333-351. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67299> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0013-9165 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67299 | |
dc.description.abstract | In an attempt to overcome limitations characteristics of past evaluations, a con ceptual model is presented as a guide to evaluators in collecting and analyzing data on office environments. A number of components of the model are then examined using data from a study of a new federal office building. Findings cooroborate those reported by others in showing that conventional offices are viewed more favorably by people occupying them than workers in either open or pooled office arrangements. The amount of workspace available to the worker is the most important factor associated with work station satisfaction, even after taking into account the type of work station and the workers' ratings of specific work station attributes. It is also demonstrated that people's feelings about the ambience of the agency within which they work and the architecture of the building influence their reactions to the immediate workspace. It is sug gested that space planners and designers who want their work appreciated by the user need concern themselves with the details of the workspace as well as the larger scale environment. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 3108 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 1277807 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.publisher | SAGE Publications, INC. | en_US |
dc.title | Evaluating Open and Conventional Office Design | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Psychology | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Social Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan; College of Architecture and Urban Planning. | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | School of Architecture and Urban Design at the University of Kansas. | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67299/2/10.1177_0013916582143005.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/0013916582143005 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | ALLEN, T. J. and P. G. GERSTBERGER (1973) "A field experiment to improve communications in a product engineering department: the non-territorial office."Human Factors15: 487-498. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Architectural Record (1978) "The new building: those guiding principles." December: 110-111. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Louis Harris and Associates (1978) The Steelcase National Survey of Office Environments: Do They Work?Grand Rapids, Ml: Steelcase, Inc. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | LUNDEN, G. (1974) "Environmental problems of office workers."Build Int.3: 24-29. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | MARANS, R. W. and W. RODGERS (1975) "Toward an understanding of com munity satisfaction," in A. Hawley and V. Rock (eds.) Metropolitan American in Contemporary Perspectives. New York: Halsted. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | MARANS, R. W. and K. S. SPRECKELMEYER (1981) Evaluating Built Environ ments: A Behavioral Approach. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research and Architectural Research Laboratory, University of Michigan. | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.