Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Comfort drives purchasing decisions for the equipment we interact with each day. Though manufacturers would like to claim to provide the most comfort over their competitors, a quantifiable metric based on physiological responses does not exist. The current research project examined the potential relationship of physiological measures with an individual's subjective level of comfort and discomfort. Heart rate variability and skin conductance responses were collected in a controlled laboratory environment along with a behavioral measure, the number of times the seated position was adjusted. During a 20 minute seated trial participants provided periodic responses to their subjective levels of comfort and discomfort. Discomfort was predicted through an interaction of the seat type (padded or rigid) and the number of adjustments made during a trial. Comfort had no significant predictors. Results showed no predictive power of heart rate variability or skin conductance responses. These results point toward use of measures of discomfort, rather than comfort, and observation of behaviors while seated.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acharya

U. R.

Joseph

K. P.

Kannathal

, et al. (2006). Heart rate variability: a review. Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing, 44, 1031–1051.

Branton

Grayson

(1967). An evaluation of train seats by observation of sitting behaviour. Ergonomics, 10(1), 35-51. https://doi:10.1080/00140136708930838.

Bush

T. R.

Hubbard

R. P.

(2008). A comparison of four office chairs using biomechanical measures. Human Factors, 50(4), 629-642.

Cascioli

Liu

Heusch

McCarthy

P. W.

(2016). A methodology using in-chair movements as an objective measure of discomfort for the purpose of statistically distinguishing between similar seat surfaces. Applied Ergonomics, 54, 100-109. https://doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2015.11.019

de Looze

M. P.

Kuijt-Evers

L. F. M.

Jaap

V. D

. (2003). Sitting comfort and discomfort and the relationships with objective measures. Ergonomics, 46(10), 985-997. https://doi:10.1080/0014013031000121977.

Helander

M. G.

Zhang

(1997). Field studies of comfort and discomfort in sitting. Ergonomics, 40(9), 895-915. https://doi:10.1080/001401397187739

Löffler

Wallmann-Sperlich

Wan

Knött

Vogel

Hurtienne

(2015). Office ergonomics driven by contextual design. Ergonomics in Design, 23(3), 31-35. https://doi:10.1177/1064804615585409.

Lueder

R. K.

(1983). Seat comfort: A review of the construct in the office environment. Human Factors, 25(6), 701-711.

Mastrigt

Groenesteijn

Vink

Kuijt-Evers

(2017). Predicting passenger seat comfort and discomfort on the basis of human, context and seat characteristics: a literature review. Ergonomics, 60(7), 889-911. https://doi:10.1080/00140139.2016.1233356

10.

Openshaw

S. D.

(2011). Predicting and quantifying seated comfort and discomfort using objective and subjective measures. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa]. https://doi:10.17077/etd.b06aeepm

11.

Shackel

Chidsey

K. D.

Shipley

(1969). The assessment of chair comfort. Ergonomics, 12, 269-306.

12.

Shaffer

Ginsberg

J. P.

(2017). An overview of heart rate variability metrics and norms. Frontiers in Public Health, 5, 258. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00258

13.

Stevens

S. S.

(1970). Neural events and the psychophysical law. Science, 170(3962), 1043-1050. www.jstor.org/stable/1730803

14.

Telfer

Spence

W. D.

Solomonidis

S. E.

(2009). The potential for actigraphy to be used as an indicator of sitting discomfort. Human Factors, 51(5), 694-704.

15.

Vergara

Page

(2002). Relationship between comfort and back posture and mobility in sitting-posture. Applied Ergonomics, 33(1),1-8. https://doi:10.1016/s0003-6870(01)00056-4

16.

Vink

(2005). Comfort and design: Principles and good practice. New York, New York. CRC Press.

17.

Zhao

S. H.

Miller

Ghulam

W. H.

Wang

(2019). Predicting aircraft seat comfort using an artificial neural network. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 29(2), 154-162.

Metrics of Comfort: Development of Physiological Correlates to Subjective Responses

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References