Many odorless and invisible pollutants contribute to poor indoor air quality at home. Previous research has shown that subjective ratings of indoor air quality are biased by a home halo effect. This effect is characterized by the tendency to subjectively assess air quality based on pleasant aspects that are unrelated to its objective quality. We hypothesize that the pleasing aesthetics of a living room image will increase the perceived indoor air quality in the room and influence the intention to improve air quality. In three studies, participants (n = 1,016) were exposed to an image of a low- or high-aesthetic living room. Perceived self-reported knowledge (SRK) of indoor air quality was surveyed. Results showed that indoor air quality was rated as better in a highly aesthetic living room. Participants with low perceived SRK were less likely to ventilate the low aesthetic living room. Practical implications for communications on indoor air risk and interior design are discussed, especially the integration of knowledge surrounding the aesthetic halo effect into the education and design processes of interior designers to heighten awareness among occupants and prioritize materials minimizing indoor air pollution. For occupants, a necessity for enhanced comprehension of indoor air quality and the adoption of proactive measures is examined through public health policies that address broader concerns surrounding indoor air quality and endorse initiatives for disseminating information related to indoor concerns.
AlapietiT.MikkolaR.PasanenP.SalonenH. (2020). The influence of wooden interior materials on indoor environment: A review. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products, 78, 617–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-020-01532-x
2.
Al KhameesN. A.AlamariH. (2009). Knowledge of, and attitudes to, indoor air pollution in Kuwaiti students, teachers and university faculty. College Student Journal, 43(4), 1306–1313.
3.
AllenM. S.IliescuD.GreiffS. (2022). Single item measures in psychological science. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 38(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000699
4.
AriesM. B.VeitchJ. A.NewshamG. R. (2010). Windows, view, and office characteristics predict physical and psychological discomfort. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 533–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.12.004
5.
Audignon-DurandS.RamalhoO.MandinC.RoudilA.Le BihanO.DelvaF.LacourtA. (2023). Indoor exposure to ultrafine particles related to domestic activities: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 904, 166947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166947
6.
BergerJ.EssahE.BlanusaT.BeamanC. P. (2022). The appearance of indoor plants and their effect on people’s perceptions of indoor air quality and subjective well-being. Building and Environment, 219, 109151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109151
7.
BerglundB.BrunekreefB.KnöppeH.LindvallT.MaroniM.MølhaveL.SkovP. (1992). Effects of indoor air pollution on human health. Indoor Air, 2(1), 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0668.1992.02-21.x
8.
BessonT.BouxomH.JaubertT. (2019). Halo it’s meat! The effect of the vegetarian label on calorie assessment and food choices. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 59(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.10.013
9.
BessonT.LalotF.BochardN.FlaudiasV.ZerhouniO. (2019). The calories underestimation of “organic” food: Exploring the impact of implicit evaluations. Appetite, 137, 134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.019
10.
BoatwrightP.AjayK.WeiZ. (2008). Research note—Should consumers use the halo to form product evaluations?Management Science, 54(1), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0742
11.
BosoÀ.ÁlvarezB.OltraC.GarridoJ.MuñozC.Galvez-GarcíaG. (2020a). The grass is always greener on my side: A field experiment examining the home halo effect. Sustainability, 12(16), 6335. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166335
12.
BosoÀ.ÁlvarezB.OltraC.GarridoJ.MuñozC.HofflingerÁ. (2020b). Out of sight, out of mind: Participatory sensing for monitoring indoor air quality. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-8058-z
13.
BreysseP. N.DietteG. B.MatsuiE. C.ButzA. M.HanselN. N.McCormackM. C. (2010). Indoor air pollution and asthma in children. Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society, 7(2), 102–106. https://doi.org/10.1513/pats.200908-083RM
14.
CetintahraG. E.CubukcuE. (2015). The influence of environmental aesthetics on economic value of housing: An empirical research on virtual environments. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 30(2), 331–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-014-9413-6
15.
ChenT.GabrielyanG.ShimizuM.QingP. (2021). The halo effect of biofortification claims on taste inference and purchase intention. British Food Journal, 123(9), 2979–2995. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2020-0614
16.
CorlanR. V.BaloghR. M.IonelI.KilyenyS. (2021). The importance of indoor air quality (IAC) monitoring. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1781(1), 012062. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1781/1/012062
17.
De HouwerJ.RichetinJ.HughesS.PeruginiM. (2019). On the assumptions that we make about the world around us: A conceptual framework for feature transformation effects. Collabra: Psychology, 5(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.229
18.
DionK. K.BerscheidE.WalsterE. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(1), 285–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033372
19.
DurandF.BonnefoyB.MarchandD. (2022). Psychological antecedents of the intention to open the windows at home and exposure to a ventilation recommendation. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 872626. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872626
20.
European Union. (2019). Attitudes of Europeans towards air quality. Special Eurobarometer 497. European Union. https://doi.org/10.2779/61604
21.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
22.
GiffordR.ScannellL.KormosC.SmolovaL.BielA.BoncuS.CorralV.GüntherfH.HanyuK.HineD.KaiserF. G.KorpelaK.LimaL. M.MertigA. G.MiraR. G.MoserG.PassafaroP.PinheiroJ. Q.SainiS.. . . UzzellD. (2009). Temporal pessimism and spatial optimism in environmental assessments: An 18-nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.06.001
23.
González-CastroJ. L.Ubillos-LandaS.Puente-MartínezA.Gracia-LeivaM. (2021). Perceived vulnerability and severity predict adherence to COVID-19 protection measures: The mediating role of instrumental coping. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 2638. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.674032
24.
GoslingS. (2018). Snoop: What your stuff says about you. Profile Books.
25.
HagenL. (2021). Pretty healthy food: How and when aesthetics enhances perceived healthiness. Journal of Marketing, 85(2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022242920944384
26.
HanK. T.RuanL. W. (2020). Effects of indoor plants on air quality: A systematic review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(14), 16019–16051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08174-9
27.
HinesJ. M.HungerfordH. R.TomeraA. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482
28.
HofflingerÁ.BosoÀ.OltraC. (2019). The home halo effect: How air quality assessment is influenced by place attachment. Human Ecology, 47(4), 589–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-019-00100-z
29.
HolmgrenM.KabanshiA.SörqvistP. (2017). Occupant perception of “green” buildings: Distinguishing physical and psychological factors. Building and Environment, 114, 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.12.017
30.
IlesI. A.PearsonJ. L.LindblomE.MoranM. B. (2021). “Tobacco and water”: Testing the health halo effect of Natural American Spirit cigarette ads and its relationship with perceived absolute harm and use intentions. Health Communication, 36(7), 804–815. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1712526
31.
JürkenbeckK.MehlhoseC.ZühlsdorfA. (2022). The influence of the Nutri-Score on the perceived healthiness of foods labelled with a nutrition claim of sugar. PLoS One, 17(8), e0272220. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272220
32.
KangK.KimT.KimH. (2021). Effect of indoor and outdoor sources on indoor particle concentrations in South Korean residential buildings. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 416, 125852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125852
33.
KergerB. D.BernalA.PaustenbachD. J.Huntley-FennerG. (2016). Halo and spillover effect illustrations for selected beneficial medical devices and drugs. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3595-7
34.
KimS.PaulosE. (2010). InAir: Sharing indoor air quality measurements and visualizations. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1861–1870. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753605
35.
KirillovaK.FuX.KucukustaD. (2020). Workplace design and well-being: Aesthetic assessments of hotel employees. The Service Industries Journal, 40(1–2), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2018.1543411
36.
KumarM.GargN. (2010). Aesthetic principles and cognitive emotion appraisals: How much of the beauty lies in the eye of the beholder?Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.06.015
37.
KumarP.SinghA. B.AroraT.SinghS.SinghR. (2023). Critical review on emerging health effects associated with the indoor air quality and its sustainable management. Science of the Total Environment, 872, 162163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162163
38.
LangerS.RamalhoO.Le PonnerE.DerbezM.KirchnerS.MandinC. (2017). Perceived indoor air quality and its relationship to air pollutants in French dwellings. Indoor Air, 27(6), 1168–1176. https://doi.org/10.1111/ina.12393
39.
LeeE.AllenA.KimB. (2013). Interior design practitioner motivations for specifying sustainable materials: Applying the theory of planned behavior to residential design. Journal of Interior Design, 38(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12017
40.
LemayE. P.Jr.ClarkM. S.GreenbergA. (2010). What is beautiful is good because what is beautiful is desired: Physical attractiveness stereotyping as projection of interpersonal goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209359700
41.
LicinaD.LangerS. (2021). Indoor air quality investigation before and after relocation to WELL-certified office buildings. Building and Environment, 204, 108182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108182
42.
LimA. Y.YoonM.KimE. H.KimH. A.LeeM. J.CheongH. K. (2021). Effects of mechanical ventilation on indoor air quality and occupant health status in energy-efficient homes: A longitudinal field study. Science of the Total Environment, 785, 147324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147324
43.
MaioneM.MoccaE.EisfeldK.KazpovY.FuzziS. (2021). Public perception of air pollution sources across Europe. Ambio, 50, 1150–1158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01450-5
44.
MandinC.GlorennecP.KêdotéN. M.KeirsbulckM.Le BourhisJ. P.MarchandD.YobouéV. (2023). Chapitre 22. Environnements intérieurs. In Presses de l’EHESP (Eds.), Environnement et santé publique (pp. 575–596).
45.
MannanM.Al-GhamdiS. G. (2021). Indoor air quality in buildings: A comprehensive review on the factors influencing air pollution in residential and commercial structure. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 3276. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063276
46.
MarchandD.BonnefoyB.DurandF.ZhouriB.HeimerA.RobertJ. (2018). Etude des représentations sociales de la qualité de l’air intérieur et évolution des comportements–Projet NUDG’AIR. CSTB Rapport, 62, 122–124.
47.
MeagherB. R. (2020). Ecologizing social psychology: The physical environment as a necessary constituent of social processes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868319845938
48.
Ministère des Solidarités et de la Santé (2022). Recommandations sanitaires générales dans le cadre de la lutte contre le Covid-19.
NazaroffW. W.BahnflethW.WargockiP.ZhangY. (2021). The COVID-19 pandemic is a global indoor air crisis that should lead to change: A message commemorating 30 years of Indoor Air. Indoor Air, 31, 1683–1686. https://doi.org/10.1111/ina.12928
51.
NicolauJ. L.MellinasJ. P.Martín-FuentesE. (2020). The halo effect: A longitudinal approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 83, 102938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102938
52.
NorbäckD.LuC.ZhangY.LiB.ZhaoZ.HuangC.ZhangX.QianH.SunY.WangJ.LiuW.SundellJ.DengQ. (2019). Sources of indoor particulate matter (PM) and outdoor air pollution in China in relation to asthma, wheeze, rhinitis and eczema among pre-school children: Synergistic effects between antibiotics use and PM10 and second-hand smoke. Environment International, 125, 252–260.
53.
PalsR.StegL.DontjeJ.SieroF. W.van Der ZeeK. I. (2014). Physical features, coherence and positive outcomes of person–environment interactions: A virtual reality study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.05.004
54.
ParineN. (1996). Sensory evaluation of indoor air quality by building occupants versus trained and untrained panels. Indoor and Built Environment, 5(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326X9600500106
55.
PasionR.PaivaT. O.FernandesC.BarbosaF. (2020). The age effect on protective behaviors during the COVID-19 outbreak: Sociodemographic, perceptions and psychological accounts. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 561785. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.561785
56.
ReimannM.ZaichkowskyJ.NeuhausC.BenderT.WeberB. (2010). Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 431–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.06.009
57.
ReitsemaA. M.JeronimusB. F.BosE. H.PsyCorona Collaboration, de JongeP.LeanderP. (2023). Age differences in hedonic adaptation to societal restrictions? Positive and negative affect trajectories during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 33 nations. Emotion, 23(5), 1440–1457. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001149
RiouxL.ScrimaF.WernerC. M. (2017). Space appropriation and place attachment: University students create places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 50, 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.02.003
RougierM.De HouwerJ.RichetinJ.HughesS.PeruginiM. (2023). From halo to conditioning and back again: Exploring the links between impression formation and learning. Collabra: Psychology, 9(1), 84560. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.84560
62.
SchultzP. W.MilfontT. L.ChanceR. C.TronuG.LuísS.AndoK.RasoolF.RooseP.M.OgunbodeC.A.CastroJ.GouveiaV. (2014). Cross-cultural evidence for spatial bias in beliefs about the severity of environmental problems. Environment and Behavior, 46(3), 267–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512458579
63.
SheeranP.WebbT. L. (2016). The intention–behavior gap. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(9), 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12265
64.
ShenH.ShenG.ChenY.RussellA. G.HuY.DuanX.MengW.XuY.YunX.LyuB.ZhaoS.HakamiA.GuoJ.TaoS.SmithK. R. (2021). Increased air pollution exposure among the Chinese population during the national quarantine in 2020. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(2), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-01018-z
65.
SimoniM.CarrozziL.BaldacciS.ScognamiglioA.PedeF. D.SapigniT.ViegiG. (2002). The Po River Delta (north Italy) indoor epidemiological study: Effects of pollutant exposure on acute respiratory symptoms and respiratory function in adults. Archives of Environmental Health: An International Journal, 57(2), 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00039890209602928
SpenceC. (2020). Using ambient scent to enhance well-being in the multisensory built environment. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 598859. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.598859
68.
SundarA.KardesF. R. (2015). The role of perceived variability and the health halo effect in nutritional inference and consumption. Psychology & Marketing, 32(5), 512–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21485
69.
TahmasebiF.WangY.CooperE.Godoy ShimizuD.StampS.MumovicD. (2021). Window operation behaviour and indoor air quality during lockdown: A monitoring-based simulation-assisted study in London. Building Services Engineering Research and Technology, 43(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/01436244211017786
70.
TaştanM.GökozanH. (2019). Real-time monitoring of indoor air quality with internet of things-based E-nose. Applied Sciences, 9(16), 3435. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9163435
71.
ThorndikeE. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071663
72.
TranV. V.ParkD.LeeY. C. (2020). Indoor air pollution, related human diseases, and recent trends in the control and improvement of indoor air quality. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(8), 2927. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082927
73.
ÜnlüF.YildirimK. (2015). Exploring the knowledge level of interior architecture and environmental design students’ on indoor air pollutants. Megaron, 10(4), 622–636. https://doi.org/10.5505/MEGARON.2015.65365
74.
UnniB.TangN.ChengY. M.GanD.AikJ. (2022). Community knowledge, attitude and behaviour towards indoor air quality: A national cross-sectional study in Singapore. Environmental Science & Policy, 136, 348–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.06.021
75.
UntilovO.GanassaliS. (2020). Product-harm science communication: The halo effect and its moderators. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 54(3), 1002–1027. https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12314
76.
VeitchJ. A.GalasiuA. D. (2011). The physiological and psychological effects of windows, daylight, and view at home. National Research Council of Canada.
77.
VijayanV. K.ParameshH.SalviS. S.DalalA. A. K. (2015). Enhancing indoor air quality–The air filter advantage. Lung India: Official Organ of Indian Chest Society, 32(5), 473. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-2113.164174
78.
WangX.WanY. (2020). Study on the application of green decoration materials in residential environment. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Architecture: Heritage, Traditions and Innovations (AHTI 2020), pp. 296–299. Atlantis Press.
79.
Wong-ParodiG.DiasM. B.TaylorM. (2018). Effect of using an indoor air quality sensor on perceptions of and behaviors toward air pollution (Pittsburgh Empowerment Library Study): Online survey and interviews. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 6(3), e48. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.8273
80.
World Health Organisation [WHO]. (2022). WHO ambient air quality database, 2022 update: Status report.
