This study examined the influence of virtual windows, used to simulate windows in a classroom, on attentional tasks. Forty undergraduates took the Trail Making Task (TMT) and Benton’s Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWA) in a classroom with either virtual windows displaying nature scenes, or blind-covered windows. Results on the TMT and COWA revealed that virtual windows had a positive influence on participants’ ability to complete these tasks and that participants were more efficient at the TMT in the virtual window condition compared to the no window condition. These results indicate that virtual windows were not a distraction in the classroom and had a positive effect on performance. Implications for using virtual windows in classrooms without windows are discussed.
BentonA. L.HamsherK.deS.SivanA. B. (1994). Multilingual aphasia examination. Iowa City, IA: AJA Associates.
2.
BertoR. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 249–259.
3.
BlackwellH. R. (1963). A general quantitative method for evaluating the visual significance of reflected glare utilizing visual performance data. Illuminating Engineering, 58, 61.
4.
CarmodyJ.SterlingR. (1993). Underground space design—A guide to subsurface utilisation and design for people in underground spaces. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
5.
CorriganJ. D.HinkeldeyM. S. (1987). Relationships between parts A and B of the trail making test. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 402–409.
6.
EarthmanG. I.LemastersL. (February, 1998). Where children learn: A discussion of how a facility affects learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Virginia Educational Facility Planners, Blacksburg, VA.
7.
GaudinoE. A.GeislerM. W.SquiresN. K. (1995). Construct validity in the Trail Making Test: What makes Part B harder ?Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 17, 529–535.
8.
GraetzK. (2006). The psychology of learning environments. In OblingerD. (Ed.), Learning spaces (pp. 6.1–6.13). Copyright, 2006 EDUCAUSE. Available electronically atwww.educause.edu/learningspaces.
9.
HerzogT. R. (1985). A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 5, 225–241.
10.
HortonC. D. (1972). Humanization of the learning environment. Arlington, VA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED066929).
11.
KahnP. H.Jr.FriedmanB.GillB.HagmanJ.SeversonR. L.FreierN. G., … Stolyar A. (2008). A plasma display window? The shifting baseline problem in a technologically mediated natural world. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 192–199.
12.
KahnemanD. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13.
KahnemanD.TreismanA. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In ParasuramanR.DaviesR.BeattyJ. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (Vol. 1, pp. 29) New York, NY: Academic Press.
14.
LezakM. D.HowiesonD. B.LoringD. W. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment (4th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
LuckieshM.MossF. K. (1940). Effects of classroom lighting upon the educational progress and visual welfare of school children. Illuminating Engineering, 35, 915–938.
PapadotasS. P. (1973). Color then motivated-color's psychological effects on students. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 57, 92–94.
18.
PhillipsR. W. (1997). Educational facility age and the academic achievement of upper elementary school students(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
19.
ReitanR. M. (1958). Validity of the Trail Making test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 8, 271–276.
20.
RuffR. M.LightR. H.ParkerS. B.LevinH. S. (1996). Benton controlled oral word association test: Reliability and updated norms. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 11, 329–338.
21.
SchneiderM. (2003). Linking school facility conditions to teacher satisfaction and success. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities.
22.
SinofskyE. R.KnirckF. G. (1981). Choose the right color for your learning style. Instructional Innovator, 26, 17–19.
