This article studies the ocular behaviour of office workers in the presence of glare. Additionally, the study seeks to obtain a new indicator for glare prediction that compensates the inaccuracies of glare predicted by the existing models of glare sensation vote (GSV), daylight glare probability (DGP) and daylight glare index. A laboratory experiment was carried out (n = 18) simulating an office space. The volunteers participated in four office tasks (reading from a screen and from a paper, writing and socializing). Two scenarios were evaluated: one with sunspots on the faces of the subjects and the other with sunspots on the working area. By means of a visible spectrum eye tracker these ocular parameters were registered: direction of gaze, the degree of opening of eye and pupil size. These ocular parameters were correlated with vertical illuminance at the eye. The results show that the degree of reduction of opening of the eye was the best predictor of visual discomfort with statistically significant differences between scenarios (p = –0.728, s = 0.001). The other important predictor was the pupil size. The degree of opening of eye and pupil size was correlated with glare indices. The degree of eye opening has a good correlation with GSV and DGP and it could be a future index of visual comfort under situations of the risk of glare.
JakubiecJAReinhartCF. The “adaptive zone”—a concept for assessing discomfort glare throughout daylit spaces. Lighting Res Technol2012; 44: 149–170.
2.
GalasiuADVeitchJA. Occupant preferences and satisfaction with the luminous environment and control systems in daylit offices: a literature review. Energy Build2006; 38: 728–742.
3.
LimHSKimG. Predicted performance of shading devices for healthy visual environment. Indoor Built Environ2010; 19: 486–496.
4.
ISO 8995-1:2002(E)/CIE S 008/E:2001: Joint ISO/CIE Standard: Lighting of Work Places – Part 1: Indoor [incl. Technical Corrigendum ISO 8995:2002/Cor. 1:2005(E)]. Vienna, Austria: Commission Internationale de L’Eclairage, 2002.
5.
BoycePR. Human factors in lighting, New York, London: Lighting Research Center; Taylor & Francis, 2003.
6.
ColomboEBarrazaJIssolioL. Effect of brief exposure to glare on brightness perception in the scotopic-mesopic range. Lighting Res Technol2000; 32: 65–69.
7.
VillalbaAMPattiniAECóricaML. Análisis de las características morfológicas de las envolventes edilicias y del entorno urbano desde la perspectiva de la iluminación natural. Ambiente Construído2012; 12: 159–175.
8.
FosterMOreszczynT. Occupant control of passive systems: the use of venetian blinds. Build Environ2001; 36: 149–155.
9.
ZhangYBarrettP. Factors influencing occupants’ blind-control behaviour in a naturally ventilated office building. Build Environ2012; 54: 137–147.
10.
Van Den WymelenbergK. Patterns of occupant interaction with window blinds: a literature review. Energy Build2012; 51: 165–176.
11.
ParpairiKBakerNVSteemersKACompagnonR. The luminance differences index: a new indicator of user preferences in daylit spaces. Lighting Res Technol2002; 34: 53–66.
12.
ByrdH. Post-occupancy evaluation of green buildings: the measured impact of over-glazing. Architect Sci Rev2012; 55: 206–212.
13.
BoycePR. Review: the impact of light in buildings on human health. Indoor Built Environ2010; 19: 8–20.
14.
LuckieshMGuthSK. Brightness in visual field at borderline between comfort and discomfort (BCD). Illum Eng1949; 44: 650–670.
15.
Osterhaus WKE and Bailey IL. Large area glare sources and their effect on visual discomfort and visual performance at computer workstations. In: Industry applications society annual meeting, October 4–9 1992, Conference Record of the 1992 IEEE, 1992; pp.1825–1829.
16.
FryGAKingVM. The pupillary response and discomfort glare. J Illum Eng Soc1975; 4: 307–324.
17.
CrawfordBH. The dependence of pupil size upon external light stimulus under static and variable conditions. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci1936; 121: 376–395.
18.
WatsonABYellottJI. A unified formula for light-adapted pupil size. J Vision2012; 12: 12–12.
19.
BermanSMBullimoreMAJacobsRJBaileyILGandhiN. An objective measure of discomfort glare. J Illum Eng Soc1994; 23: 40–49.
20.
BindaPPereverzevaMMurraySO. Pupil constrictions to photographs of the sun. J Vision2013; 13: 8–8.
21.
Smith WJ. A review of literature relating to visual fatigue. In: Proceedings of the human factors and Ergonomics Society annual meeting, Boston, USA, October 1979. Vol. 23; pp.362–366.
22.
Hubalek S and Schierz C. LichtBlick—photometrical situation and eye movements at VDU work places. In: CIE symposium, 2004. Vol. 4; pp.322–324.
23.
Mende S, Wienold J, Stoll J, Einhäuser W, Andersen M and Sarey Khanie M. Uncovering relationships between view direction patterns and glare perception in a daylit workspace. In: Proceedings of LUXEUROPA, Krakow, Poland, September 17–19 2013.
24.
MonsterAWChanHCO’ConnorD. Long-term trends in human eye blink rate. Biotelemetry Patient Monitor1977; 5: 206–222.
25.
KarsonCNBermanKFDonnellyEFMendelsonWBKleinmanJEWyattRJ. Speaking, thinking, and blinking. Psychiatry Res1981; 5: 243–246.
26.
O’Donnell RD and Eggemeier FT. Workload assessment methodology. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP (eds) Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. New York: Wiley Interscience, 1986, p.42.
27.
HopkinsonRG. Glare from windows. Construct Res Dev J (CONRAD)1977; 1: 98–105.
28.
Wienold J. Dynamic daylight glare evaluation. In: XI international IBPSA conference, Glasgow, Scotland, July 27–30 2009; pp.944–951.
29.
Christoffersen J and Wienold J. Assessment of user reaction to glare with three solar shading systems. In: Indoor Air 2008, Proceedings of The 11th international conference on indoor air quality and climate, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 17–22 2008, paper ID: 419.
30.
IwataTTokuraM. Examination of the limitations of predicted glare sensation vote (PGSV) as a glare index for a large source towards a comprehensive development of discomfort glare evaluation. Lighting Res Technol1998; 30: 81–88.
31.
ClearRD. Discomfort glare: what do we actually know?Lighting Res Technol2013; 45: 141–158.
32.
VosJJ. Reflections on glare. Lighting Res Technol2003; 35: 163–175.
33.
SchenkmanBFukudaTPerssonB. Glare from monitors measured with subjective scales and eye movements. Displays1999; 20: 11–21.
34.
MacLeodCM. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychol Bull1991; 109: 163–163.
35.
Wästlund E. Experimental studies of human-computer interaction: working memory and mental workload in complex cognition. PhD Thesis, Gothenburg University, Sweden, 2007.
36.
Hashizume A, Kurosu M and Kaneko T. Multi-window system and the working memory. In: Springer Berlin/Heidelberg (eds) Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics. New York: Springer, 2007, pp.297–305.
37.
RodriguezRGPattiniA. Tolerance of discomfort glare from a large area source for work on a visual display. Lighting Res Technol. Epub ahead of print 21 December 2012. DOI: 10.1177/1477153512470386.
38.
Christoffersen J and Wienold J. Monitoring Procedure for assessment of user reaction to glare. Report for Energy and Comfort Control for Building management systems (ECCO-Build), EU Commission. Report ECCO-DBUR-0303-01, 31 May 2005.
39.
Wienold J. Daylight glare in office. PhD Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Germany, 2009.
40.
Li D, Winfield D and Parkhurst DJ. Starburst: a hybrid algorithm for video-based eye tracking combining feature-based and model-based approaches. In: Computer vision and pattern recognition-workshops, 2005. CVPR Workshops. IEEE Computer Society Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, June 25 2005, p.79.
41.
Tsao L-J. Driver drowsiness detection and warning under various illumination conditions. Master Thesis, Computer Science and Information Engineering Dept., National Central Univ., Chungli, Taiwan, 2008.
42.
Bianchetti A. Medición de diámetro pupilar ocular. In XI Workshop de Investigadores en Ciencias de la Computación, La Plata, Argentina, May 2009; pp.187–191.
43.
Rolo GonzálezGDíaz CabreraDHernández FernaudE. Desarrollo de una Escala Subjetiva de Carga Mental de Trabajo (ESCAM). Revista de Psicolog{í}a del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones2009; 25: 29–37.
44.
Iqbal ST, Zheng XS and Bailey BP. Task-evoked pupillary response to mental workload in human-computer interaction. In: CHI’04 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, Vienna, Austria, April 24–29 2004; pp.1477–1480.
45.
StonePTHarkerSDP. Individual and group differences in discomfort glare responses. Lighting Res Technol1973; 5: 41–49.
46.
YunGYShinJYKimJT. Influence of window views on the subjective evaluation of discomfort glare. Indoor Built Environ2011; 20: 65–74.
