We developed a web application to investigate online-based experiments for the psychovisual assessment of luminous environments. We reproduced online a laboratory experiment conducted in a virtual environment, in which the luminous environment of an office room lit by different combinations of ambient/task lighting was assessed by observers. A control panel of 30 observers performed both experiments. Statistical analyses revealed no statistically significant differences between data collected in the laboratory and online. In addition, an online-based experiment involving 1114 observers was conducted to study the uncontrolled experimental conditions that may impact results. We show that, by increasing the panel size, bias, mainly related to the perceived contrast and brightness of the display and the brightness of the surrounding area is removed. Findings suggest that 100 observers are enough to remove bias.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SprowIBaranczukZStammTZollikerP. Web-based psychometric evaluation of image quality: Proceedings of Image Quality and System Performance VI, Electronic Imaging 2009. San José, USA,SPIE, vol. 7242, 2009.
2.
BoycePREklundNHSimpsonSN. Individual lighting control: task performance, mood, and illuminance. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society2000; 19: 131–142.
3.
NewshamGArsenaultCVeitchJToscoAMDuvalC. Task lighting effects on office worker satisfaction and performance, and energy efficiency. Leukos2005; 1: 7–26.
4.
EngeldrumPG. Psychometric Scaling: A Toolkit for Imaging Systems Development, Winchester, MA: Imcotek Press, 2000.
5.
Van VeenHBülthoffHGivatyG. Psychophysical experiments on the internet: an evaluation. European Conference on Visual Perception1998; 27: 179–179.
6.
ZuffiSBeltrameEScalaP. Visual experiments on the web: design of a web-based visual experiment management system: Proceedings of Image Quality and System Performance V. San José, CA, USA,SPIE, vol. 6808, 2008.
7.
BirnbaumMH. Human research and data collection via the internet. Annual Review of Psychology2004; 55: 803–832.
8.
Moroney N. Unconstrained web-based color naming experiment. In: Color Imaging: Device Independent Color, Color Hardcopy, and Graphics Arts VIII. Vol. 5008. Editors Reiner Eschbach, Gabriel Marcu, Santa Clara, CA: SPIE, 2003, pp. 36–46.
9.
RasmussenD. Online image quality surveys based on response time: Proceedings of Image Quality and System Performance V. San José, CA, USA,SPIE, vol. 6808, 2008: 1–12.
10.
Simone G, Pedersen M, Hardeberg JY. Measuring perceptual contrast in uncontrolled environments: Proceedings of 2nd European Workshop on Visual Information Processing EUVIP, Paris, France, 2010.
11.
ZuffiSScalaPBrambillaCBerettaG. Web-based vs. controlled environment psychophysics experiments: Proceedings of IS&T/SPIE Image Quality and System Performance IV. San José, CA, USA,SPIE, vol. 6494, 2007.
12.
LinhartFScartezziniJL. Evening office lighting and visual comfort vs. energy efficiency vs. performance?Building and Environment2011; 46: 981–989.
13.
DurakAOlguntürkNCYenerCGüvençDGürçinarY. Impact of lighting arrangements and illuminances on different impressions of a room. Building and Environment2007; 42: 3476–3482.
14.
LaurentinCBerruttoVFontoynontM. Effect of thermal conditions and light source type on visual comfort appraisal. Lighting Research and Technology2000; 32: 223–233.
15.
NewshamGRRichardsonCBlanchetCVeitchJA. Lighting quality research using rendered images of offices. Lighting Research and Technology2005; 37: 93–115.
16.
OiN. The difference among generations in evaluating interior lighting environment. Journal of Physiological Anthropology and Applied Human Science2005; 24: 87–91.
17.
NewhsamGRCetegenDVeitchJAWhiteheadL. Comparing lighting quality evaluations of real scenes with those from high dynamic range and conventional images. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception2010; 7: 1–25.
18.
Charton V. Etude comparative de la perception d'ambiances lumineuses en milieu réel et en milieu virtuel. PhD INSA de Lyon, 2002.
19.
NewshamGRMarchandRGVeitchJA. Preferred surface luminances in offices, by evolution. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society2004; 33: 14–29.
20.
BeanAHopkinsA. Task and background lighting. Lighting Research and Technology1980; 12: 135–139.
21.
YamakawaKWatabeKInanumaMSakataKTakedaH. A study on the practical use of a task and ambient lighting system in an office. Journal of Light and Visual Environment2000; 24: 15–18.
22.
McKennanGParryC. An investigation of task lighting for offices. Lighting Research and Technology1984; 16: 171–186.
23.
TabuchiYMatsushimaKNakamuraH. Preferred illuminances on surrounding surfaces in relation to task illuminance in office room using task-ambient lighting. Journal of Light and Visual Environment1995; 19: 28–39.
24.
BoycePVeitchJNewshamGJonesCHeerwagenJMyerMHunterCM. Lighting quality and office work: two field simulation experiments. Lighting Research and Technology2006; 38: 191–223.
25.
Villa C, Parent E, Labayrade R. Calibrating a display device for subjective visual comfort tests: selection of light simulation programs and post-production operations: Proceedings of the International Commission on Illumination CIE 2010 “Lighting Quality and Energy Efficiency”, Vienna, Austria, 2010, pp. 783–791.
26.
ReinhardE. Parameter estimation for photographic tone reproduction. Journal of Graphics Tools2002; 7: 45–52.
27.
VillaCLabayradeR. Calibrating a display device for subjective visual comfort tests: selection of a tone-mapping operator: Proceedings of the International Commission on Illumination CIE 2010 “Lighting Quality and Energy Efficiency”, 2010. Vienna, Austria, 2010, pp.792–800.
28.
VillaCLabayradeR. Psychovisual assessment of tone-mapping operators for global appearance and colour reproduction: Proceedings of Colour in Graphics Imaging and Vision 2010, 2010. Joensuu, Finland, 2010, pp.189–196.
