A STUDY ON PERCEPTION OF DAYLIGHT SHADOWS AND VISUAL COMFORT

IN LIBRARY READING AREAS

Yingying Liu
Department of Architecture
100 Pacific Hall
1206 University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403-1206
[email protected]

ABSTRACT factors of daylight, such as illuminance, luminance, glare,

and electric lighting flickers, as well as human factors such
The Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommends as aesthetic qualities of daylight and views as attributes of
illuminance and uniformity targets (1), which are at times visual comfort. Since most visual comfort studies focus on
difficult to achieve, especially with daylight only. Assessing daylight, shadows are very often overlooked (4).
visual comfort in daylit environments such as libraries is
important, particularly since libraries often have large daylit 1.1 Perception of Daylight Shadows in Architecture
spaces. The term “daylight shadow” is defined as the
shadow produced by daylight and objects as opposed to A number of architects recognize shadows as elements that
shadows produced by electric light and objects. Architects contribute to a building’s aesthetic and feeling of space (5).
and artists widely acclaim that shadows are critical elements Yutaka Izue asserts that shadow is enormously influential in
that affect the building occupants’ emotions and that, achieving happiness and sorrow (6); Tadao Ando proposes
consequently, they warrant more empirical research. This that daylight and shadow add richness to space and trigger
study examines the visual comfort related to daylight dynamic space qualities (7). Moreover, researchers have
shadows. The methodology uses both quantitative and found that shadowed space creates a feeling of refuge and
qualitative approaches. In the summer of 2012, librarian less illuminated environments provide a sense of security
interviews, pre-tests, and post-test surveys were conducted and privacy (8). Daylight shadows are a significant part of
in three Oregon libraries. Based on survey responses from architectural design. The daylight shadows in the Louvre
93 subjects, the data showed there was a tendency for Pyramid designed by I. M. Pei in 1989 and in the Institut du
people to feel more visually comfortable if they had positive Monde Arabe in Paris designed by architect Jean Nouvel in
perceptions of daylight shadows. 1995 visually connect the openings’ designs to building
occupants. In the Three Shadows Photography Art Center,
daylight shadows cast on exterior walls resemble the pattern
1. INTRODUCTION of surrounding trees and enrich the building façade (9).
Furthermore, shadow patterns in the Phillips Exeter
Historically, lighting energy conservation became essential Academy Library articulate the concept of enlightenment in
for sustainable design in recent decades (2). In the United reading and reduce damage from daylight to the books.
States, 10% of building energy consumption in 2010 was Besides that, daylight and shadow convey holy feelings in
attributed to electric lighting (3). Maximizing daylight some religious buildings. The sun-worshipping ancient
utilization is one strategy used to reduce electric energy for Egyptians oriented the Abu Simbel Temple so that the first
lighting. However, the variability of daylight challenges daylight beam would shine on the gods at the deepest end
occupants’ visual comfort. A key challenge for designers is on October 22 and February 22 (10). In the Church of Light,
to balance the building occupants’ expectations and desire Ando projects daylight and shadow through a cross-shaped
for electric lighting with long-term operational costs and opening. The contrasting illuminance resembles the power
performance. Researchers have studied the various physical of God and the ignorance of human beings.

1
1.2 Psychological Impact from Daylight Shadows be comfortable outside the IES visual comfort zones. Visual
comfort assessment requires further studies on human
Sensations within architecture are more important than perceptions.
meanings and values defined by architects (11). Shadow,
which subtly alters human sensation, at all times is the
source of the unknown and abstraction (12). The human 2. THE PROBLEM & HYPOTHESIS
neurological system analyzes light based on the lighting
differences instead of lighting alone (13). Contrasting This research seeks findings through addressing the
daylight and shadow can subconsciously change the following questions: What are people’s opinions regarding
perceptions and feelings of people in the space (12, 14). patches of shadows and shadow movements in libraries?
Illumination of a space affects the psychological How are perceptions of shadow patches and shadow
performance of people, as evidenced in their temper, movements related to evaluation of visual comfort? Can
impulsivity, and behavior (15). It has been found that shadow be designed consciously by architects to improve
students are less stressed and more passionate about visual comfort in reading spaces? Therefore, the hypothesis
classroom programs when the lighting is lowered (16). of this paper is: library patrons are visually more
However, low illumination stimulates a person’s comfortable in libraries with satisfying daylight shadows.
consciousness of others’ nearness (17).

1.3 Visual Comfort 3. METHODOLOGY & EQUIPMENT

The perception of indoor visual comfort, which involves Three college libraries were selected as locations for this
building occupants’ satisfaction and space assessment, study. Daylit reading spaces with curtain walls or large
depends upon a complex evaluation system. Comfort windows were selected. Physical measurements of lighting
assessment is primarily how people perceive a space. A and human subject evaluations were conducted to evaluate
previous study proposed that comfort evaluation is a these reading spaces.
structure consisting of “physical, physiological,
psychological and social” attributes of building occupants 3.1 Pre-Test
(18). Fulfillment of comfort is found to relate to the
expectations of people and how space satisfies building The researcher conducted a pre-test to select the library
occupants’ requirements. Aesthetic judgment is an attribute areas with the most beautiful shadows. Photos of these spots
influencing people’s perception of a space (19, 20). were taken to capture images of shadows. Five photos were
Researchers have also discovered that beautiful spaces eventually selected from each library. A group of volunteer
improve concentration and productivity (21, 22). Building subjects with architectural and other backgrounds,
occupants in beautiful architectural spaces are sometimes participated in evaluation of the shadow images.
more likely to tolerate uncomfortable lighting conditions in Architecture students and faculty were considered to be
indoor environments. Since well-designed shadows subjects with architectural backgrounds. Subjects with other
essentially improve the aesthetics of spaces, perceptions of backgrounds were considered to be building users.
shadows tend to affect visual comfort.
3.2 Site Study
1.4 Daylight Shadow in Library Design
Assessment of the physical lighting conditions of the indoor
At present, libraries are essential spaces for education and environments in selected libraries included measuring
socialization. A library is a good building typology for this illuminance, analyzing the use of electrical lighting fixtures,
study, since library buildings consume 45% of building and calculating contrast ratios to determine glare conditions.
energy for maintaining electric lighting fixtures to achieve The study referenced IES lighting standards as the
good visual conditions (23). More research on the presence guidelines for visual comfort determination. The site study
of daylight shadow in library space is necessary to assist also recorded other indoor visual comfort attributes.
architects in achieving visual comfort and environmental
goals. Visual comfort in libraries is closely connected to the 3.3 Library Manager and Librarian Interviews
occupants’ attitude toward reading and studying. IES
recommends a default illuminance ratio of 5:1 and 500 lux Library managers and librarians participated in interviews to
for users who are from 25 to 65 years old. Although IES provide their opinions regarding daylight shadows and
encourages maximum utilization of daylight, it also visual comfort in the reading spaces. Librarians and
recognizes that it is almost impossible to achieve lighting managers also gave background information about the
uniformity target with. However, people are often found to libraries and architectural designs during interviews. They

2
were asked for general information such as operational shadow patches were unpleasant, agreed that shadows were
hours, temperatures maintained in the libraries, and where frustrating and interesting, and was neutral about shadow
library patrons liked to congregate in reading spaces. patches being beautiful. The subject also disagreed that
Moreover, librarians were able to offer anecdotal feedback shadow movements were disturbing, agreed that the
from library patrons based on their previous experience. movements were uncontrollable, felt neutral that movements
help to keep track of time, and agreed that the shadow
3.4 Library Patron Survey movements help one to relate to nature. The circled numbers
correspond to the evaluation options selected by the subject.
Library patrons were invited to participate in a survey by After calculation, this particular subject’s overall daylight
verbal request. Surveys were conducted only during sunny shadow evaluation score is 0.25, which is somewhat
days, so that shadow patches would be visible. The surveys positive.
consisted of qualitative questions for assessing the overall
comfort, visual comfort, aesthetic qualities, perceptions of TABLE 2: SAMPLE SCORING SHEET FOR A
shadow patches, and perceptions of shadow movements. For SUBJECT’S OPINIONS ABOUT DAYLIGHT
shadow evaluation, there were questions asking the SHADOWS
participants to give their impressions of shadow patches as

Strongly Disagree
“unpleasant,” “frustrating,” “interesting,” or “beautiful”

Strongly Agree

Selected Score
(24). Other questions asked the participants to give their
opinions of shadow movements by selecting “disturbing,”
“uncontrollable,” “helps to keep track of time,” and “helps

Disagree

Neutral

Agree
to relate to nature” (8). A continuous five-point scale was
used for qualitative questions. Questions about visual
comfort were asked before the questions about shadows. Do you find “patches” of daylight and shadows in this
Locations of the subjects were recorded and illuminance location?
measured with the Mastech Light Meter LX1010BS. The Score for “Unpleasant” +2 +1 0 -1 -2 +1
number of overcast days in the winter precluded a reliable Score for “Frustrating” +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -1
number of days to conduct this study, so the study took Score for “Interesting” -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +1
place in the summer months of 2012.
Score for “Beautiful” -2 -1 0 +1 +2 0
Do you find the movements of shadows in the space
3.5 Data Analysis
Score for “Disturbing” +2 +1 0 -1 -2 +1
For qualitative survey question, positive scores (+1, +2) Score for
+2 +1 0 -1 -2 -1
were assigned for positive responses and negative scores (- “Uncontrollable”
1, -2) for negative responses (Table 1). The average Score for “Helps to keep -1
-2 0 +1 +2 0
evaluation scores were calculated for questions, which track of time”
consist of sub-attributes such as aesthetic qualities. A slight Score for “Helps to relate 0
-2 -1 +1 +2 +1
difference scoring system was designed for shadow to nature”
evaluations. Positive and negative opinions of shadows were Total score +1-1+1+0+1-1+0+1 = 2
assigned positive and negative values, respectively, Overall shadow
depending on the connotations of the adjective evaluation 2 / 8 = 0.25
(positive/negative).
The visual comfort evaluation results were plotted against
TABLE 1: SCORING METHOD the shadow evaluation results in charts to determine the
relationships between these perceptions. The visual comfort
evaluation results were plotted against evaluation results of
Strongly Disagree
Very Unsatisfied/

other well-studied attributes such as overall comfort and

Strongly Agree
Very Satisfied/

views and aesthetic qualities, to verify the relationships, too.

Unsatisfied/

The paper compared these relationships for shadow

Satisfied/
Disagree

Neutral

evaluation analysis.
Agree

This study also compared the illuminance levels measured

Score -2 -1 0 +1 +2
at the spots against IES visual comfort criteria for library
reading spaces. The study sought to determine the
Table 2 shows an example of this scoring method for each discrepancy between actual visual comfort and expected
library survey subject. For example, a subject disagreed that visual comfort based on IES design guideline.

3
4. FINDINGS Photos were taken in the study areas along the east and west
sides of the atrium.
4.1 Site Visit
4.5 Pre-test
Three libraries were visited within one week during the
summer of 2012. The photos for the pre-test were taken Photos of daylight shadows were taken in each library
during these visits of each library. Each library’s during the site visit. 5 photos of each library were selected
background, history, and general layout were also studied. for pre-test surveys. 38 students volunteered to participate in
the pre-test to select the images with the most beautiful
4.2 Library A daylight shadow. Of the 38 volunteers, 11 had architecture
backgrounds and 27 had other backgrounds. The votes of
Library A was a four-story complex. The library was the two groups were compared to predict the judgments of
designed and constructed in 1937. The south, east, and west architects and building occupants.
facades had large windows from the second floor to the
fourth floor. The largest study area, which was added in For Library A, 30.0% of subjects voted for Image 1. Image
1950 on the south side of the library, was the space for this 1 of Library A had large double-story windows onto the
study. The study area had double-story volume. There was a landscape. Image 1 and Image 5, which received 27.5% of
lawn area outside the south façade. Grass, trees, and votes, were brighter compared to the other images. For
adjacent buildings were the main scenes for the study area. Library B, 45% of subjects selected Image 3, which had
The materials of the windows in the study area were more diverse shadow patterns and material variety. In both
designed to provide good thermal insulation, reduce Image 1 and Image 3 of Library B, the shadows cast by
ultraviolet penetration, and lower glare. Patches of shadow window mullions created a rhythm on the floor. For Library
covered the study area partially most of the time. Library A C, Image 4 was selected by 40.0% of subjects. The patches
was visited at around 3pm on July 20, 2012. of daylight and shadows in Image 4 of Library C had
various shapes, and the bookshelves in the image generated
4.3 Library B a graphic rhythm.

Library B was a five-story building built in 1965. The TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF PRE-TEST RESULTS
building had a rectangular shape with a semi-circle
recession on one side of the rectangle. Curtain walls were Library A Library B Library C
designed for the curve façade of the semi-circle. Sunshades Image 1 30.0% 30.0% 15.0%
extruded from the ceiling level of the first floor. Daylight Image 2 12.5% 5.0% 15.0%
shadows were observable along the edge of the curved Image 3 20.0% 45.0% 17.5%
curtain wall. There were curtains, which are operable by Image 4 10.0% 12.5% 40.0%
library patrons, along the curved window. There was a Image 5 27.5% 7.5% 12.5%
narrow corridor along the curtain wall where the study
carrels were located. A daylight shadow was cast on top of
all the tables on sunny days. Library B measurements took
place around 3pm on July 29, 2012; photos were taken at
the study tables from the second floor to the fourth floor.

4.4 Library C

Library C was constructed in 1961. The entire library space

was one story below ground level. There was a square
atrium at the center and multi-story buildings along the four
sides of the atrium. The architect designed the curtain walls Fig. 1: Selected Shadow Images from Library A, B, and C.
around the central atrium. Patches of shadows were cast on
the area around the atrium. There was no shading device on 4.6 Library Patrons Survey
the walls. Horizontal decorating bars were designed on the
curtain walls. The materials of the bars cast colorful 32 patrons of Library A, 31 patrons of Library B, and 11
shadows. There were study tables right next to the curtain patrons of Library C participated in the library patron
walls. Shadows were also cast on the study tables. Library C surveys. An additional 11 volunteers participated in surveys
measurements were taken around 9am on July 20, 2012. in Library C to obtain a more balanced evaluation.

4
4.6.1 Comfort Level of Library Patrons TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS

From the survey results, most of the subjects in the three

Library

Library

Library
libraries were satisfied with the overall comfort of the study

Total
areas (1.08). High performance window in Library A and

C
curtains in Library B may be the reasons for the better visual Score Calculated from Opinions
comfort evaluations (0.94). Subjects from Library C were Overall comfort 1.00 1.10 1.13 1.08
slightly neutral about visual comfort (0.67). The results are
consistent with the fact that patches of shadows directly Visual comfort 0.94 0.94 0.67 0.85
covered all the study tables in Library C. Subjects from Lighting conditions for activities
Library C were neutral about lighting for using computers Reading/writing 1.03 1.06 0.70 0.93
(0.70). The strong lighting contrasts in study carrels and
bookshelves in Library C may be the cause for lower Using computer 0.90 0.90 0.07 0.63
satisfaction. The limitation of these questions is that most of Searching books 0.61 0.71 0.43 0.59
the subjects were conducting only one or two of the Views 1.34 1.26 0.77 1.13
activities listed when they did the survey. The evaluations of Aesthetic qualities
other activities were based on their previous experience or
Brightness 0.88 0.94 0.67 0.83
estimation.
Spaciousness 1.03 1.13 0.47 0.88
4.6.2 Library Feature Evaluation Cheerfulness 0.47 0.81 0.40 0.56
Colorfulness 0.25 0.23 0.37 0.28
Table 4 shows the higher satisfaction with views in Library
A and B (1.34 and 1.26), while subjects from Library C Privacy 0.16 -0.03 0.33 0.15
were somewhat satisfied (0.77). Views from Library A and Acoustics 0.56 0.26 0.33 0.39
B were wide open to the outdoor natural landscape. Sources of visual discomfort
However, views from Library C included only a small,
Brightness 0.19 0.26 0.41 0.28
enclosed, manmade garden within the central atrium. The
general satisfaction regarding views indicates that the views Light distribution 0.19 0.32 0.45 0.32
for libraries are usually well designed. Subjects from Glare 0.28 0.52 0.55 0.45
Library C were satisfied with or neutral about most of the
Electrical light flicker 0.16 0.52 -0.03 0.22
qualities, except for the brightness of the space (0.67). The
result corresponds to the fact that all the study carrels in Reflections 0.28 0.00 -0.03 0.09
Library C were right next to the curtain walls and the Shading devices needed
illuminance levels in Library C reading spaces were Blinds 0.26 0.58 0.27 0.37
generally high when shadows appeared. Louvers 0.13 -0.13 -0.07 -0.02
4.6.3 Visual Discomfort and Shading Device External sun shade 0.16 0.03 0.29 0.16
Daylight-reflecting shelf -0.16 0.06 0.31 0.07
The opinions regarding sources of visual discomfort were Attention to shadows -0.47 0.10 -0.07 -0.15
very diverse. This finding indicates that lighting conditions
in different libraries were very dissimilar from one to the Opinions of “patches” of daylight and shadows
other. In general, brightness, light distribution, and glare Unpleasant -0.19 -0.65 -0.30 -0.38
were the main sources of visual discomfort (0.28, 0.32 and Frustrating -0.42 -0.71 -0.43 -0.52
0.45). Subjects from Library A were mostly neutral about
Interesting 0.16 0.35 0.10 0.21
discomfort sources and the need for shading devices. The
high performance window in Library A might explain the Beautiful 0.34 0.45 0.20 0.33
low discomfort, even without the shading devices. Subjects Attention to shadows’
-0.03 -0.10 0.07 -0.02
from Library B and C agreed that there were lighting issues movements
related to direct sunlight. Subjects from Library B generally Opinions of the movements of shadows
agreed that blinds were needed, even when curtains existed. Disturbing -0.44 -0.74 -0.55 -0.58
The lack of shading devices and performance strategies in
Uncontrollable -0.03 -0.50 0.00 -0.18
Library C might explain the evaluations in Library C.
Subjects from Library C tended to favor shading devices Help to keep track of
0.35 -0.26 0.10 0.07
which did not block the views. Overall, subjects were time
slightly neutral about shading devices. Help to relate to nature 0.48 0.32 0.37 0.39

5
4.6.4 Shadow Evaluations 5. ANALYSIS

Library survey subjects were somewhat neutral about As stated in the methodology section, the shadow attributes
noticing the shadows (-0.15). This result is very similar to were analyzed separately to evaluate the overall perceptions
the librarian interview results. The shadows in the libraries of daylight shadows. Figures 2 and 3 present the distribution
were paid little attention by subjects. Subjects from Library of shadow evaluation scores from all the survey subjects.
B had slightly more positive opinions about shadow patches. There were more subjects with positive scores for shadow
The presence of shading devices in Library B likely evaluations. Most subjects had a score around +0.4. Based
improved the subjects’ control over shadows and led to on this result, subjects were considered generally to have
shadow appreciation. As a whole, all subjects were inclined slightly positive opinions on patches of shadows and
to have slightly positive shadow evaluations. movements of shadows.

The question regarding noticing the movements of shadows

obtained results that were very similar to those for the
question about noticing shadow patches. Subjects from the
three libraries were mostly neutral about noticing
movements of shadows (-0.02). The subjects from the three
libraries had slightly different opinions regarding the
attributes of “uncontrollable” and “help to keep track of
time.” The curtains in Library B again were likely to
improve the subjects’ perceived control over shadows.
However, the curtains might also have undermined the
connection between shadow movements and time. In
general, the subjects from all three libraries had slightly
positive evaluations of shadow movements. The results
confirm that these libraries do not create ideal shadows. Fig. 2: Overall Shadow Evaluations.

TABLE 5: DEMOGRAPHICS OF LIBRARY PATRONS Figure 3 shows the chart of visual comfort evaluations
plotted against shadow evaluations and seeks a relationship
Library Library Library between these factors. The sizes of the bubbles indicate the
Total number of subjects who had the same selections. The
A B C
No. of Subjects gradient of the regression line is 0.3736, while the R²of the
Average time spent in this library per day regression line is 0.0788, which is very small. There are
A few minutes 3 1 6 10 insufficient data to indicate any correlation. However, a
One hour 3 3 10 16 weak positive trend is found between these factors from the
A few hours 22 26 13 61 chart. There is a tendency for subjects who have more
positive daylight shadow evaluations to feel more visually
The whole day 3 2 1 6
satisfied.
Subject’s current activity
Reading/writing 25 22 23 70
Using computer 8 13 7 28
Searching 1 0 3 4
bookshelves
Others 1 1 2 4
Subject’s Age
< 25 19 20 20 59
– 65 11 11 10 32
> 65 1 0 0 1
Study/working hours per day
One hour 2 2 1 5
Two to five hours 12 16 11 39
Five to eight 11 8 13 32
hours
> eight hours 6 6 5 17 Fig. 3: Visual Comfort against Shadow Evaluation.

6
Similar analysis was done to study the relationship of visual Figure 5 shows the actual comfort of subjects in each
comfort to well-studied attributes overall comfort, views, condition. The blue bubbles represent the subjects who were
and aesthetic qualities. The evaluations of the aesthetic satisfied with or neutral about their visual comfort; the red
qualities combined the scores of the six qualities. The bubbles represent subjects who were unsatisfied with their
results indicate weak positive relationships between these visual comfort. The chart indicates that a number of subjects
attributes, too. The gradients of the regression lines of these who were outside or far outside the IES comfort zone were
charts are 0.63, 0.32, and 0.41, respectively. The R²values satisfied with or neutral about their visual comfort in the
of regression lines are 0.25, 0.13, and 0.11, respectively. space. There were also a small number of subjects who felt
Therefore, there is no linear correlation, but a positive trend uncomfortable even in the IES visual comfort zone. It is
between visual comfort and these attributes. The results of found that 13 subjects who felt comfortable outside the
the shadow evaluations are similar to those of view comfort zone and 11 of them had positive shadow
evaluations and can be used as a visual comfort attribute in evaluations. 2 subjects who felt uncomfortable in the IES
further studies. comfort zone and both of them had negative shadow
evaluations. Although the sample size is small, the results
Figure 4 presents the lighting measurements from the are consistent with the positive trend between visual
libraries when the surveys were conducted. The green frame comfort and shadow evaluation.
marks the IES’ recommended lighting conditions for library
reading areas. The blue bubbles represent the subjects in The pre-test intended to analyze the votes of two subject
areas that met the IES standards for visual comfort, and the groups based on their backgrounds. This test selected the
red bubbles represent the subjects in areas that failed to most beautiful shadow images from each library and
meet the IES visual comfort standards. The charts below determined the disparities between perceptions of designers
shows that the majority of the subjects were studying under and users. The percentages of votes from the two groups
lighting conditions that put them within the IES visual were very similar for the Library A images. The percentages
comfort zone. A small number of subjects were in areas of votes from the two subject groups were somewhat
with conditions that put them far outside the IES visual different for the Library B and Library C images. However,
comfort zone. the difference between these two groups was relatively
small. The results indicate that aesthetic judgments of
subjects with architectural backgrounds and other
backgrounds are fairly similar; therefore, designers tend to
design the daylight shadows that are appealing to building
users.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The illuminance of some daylit reading areas of selected

libraries did not fall within IES visual comfort zones during
the summer of 2012. Very often the contrast between
shadowed and daylit areas was higher than the
Fig. 4. Illuminance and the IES Comfort Zone. recommended illuminance ratios. Nevertheless, subjects
from three libraries generally expressed satisfaction with
their visual comfort in daylit reading areas and also
expressed positive opinions regarding shadow patches and
shadow movements. There is a positive tendenc between
visual comfort and daylight shadow evaluations. My
hypothesis, “library patrons are visually comfortable in
libraries with satisfying daylight shadows,” is generally
supported by the data in this study. However, since the
sample sizes were small and the relationships are subtle,
perhaps the nuances were not captured using the methods in
this study.

A small number of survey subjects gave visual comfort

evaluations, which contradicted the IES visual comfort
Fig. 5: Illuminance and Actual Visual Comfort. standards. Subjects who were satisfied with conditions well

7
outside the IES visual comfort zone generally had positive (6) Izue, Yutaka. “Shadow and Form.” The Japan Architect
opinions of daylight shadows, and subjects who were 46 (1971): 9899
unsatisfied with conditions within the IES visual comfort (7) Ando, Tadao. “Light, Shadow and Form: The Koshino
zone had negative opinions of daylight shadows. Although House.” Via 11 (1990): 5361
the number of subjects was small, it is still feasible to infer (8) Kellert, Stephen R., Judith H. Heerwagen, and Martin L.
that building occupants are more likely to tolerate Mador. Biophilic Design. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley &
undesirable conditions if they appreciate daylight shadows. Sons, Inc., 2008
Further studies are needed to sustain this argument. (9) Ai, Weiwei. “Three Shadows Photography Art Center.”
Lotus International 141 (2010): 3235
According to the results of the pre-test, subjects had a (10) Egypt State Information Service. 2011
distinguishable preference over daylight shadow images. <http://www.sis.gov.eg/En/Story.aspx?sid=1200>
This finding necessitates further studies on aesthetic (11) Blackler, Zoe. “Juhani Pallasmaa in Praise of Shadows
evaluations of diverse shadow patches and shadow at the Cooper Union in New York.” The Architectural
movements. With information from further studies, Review 28 April 2011: 229
designers might be able to design shadow patches that are (12) Shulman, Julius. “Introducing Shadows.” American
attractive to and visually comfortable for building Institute of Architects 59.2 (1973): 26
occupants. Library manager and librarian interviews as well (13) Logvinenko, Alexander D., and Rumi Tokunaga.
as patron surveys indicate that shadow patches and “Lightness Constancy and Illumination Discounting.”
movements of shadows are not noticed by most occupants. Attention Perception & Psychophysics 73 (2011): 1886–
Perception of daylight shadows tends to affect the subjects’ 1902
feelings subconsciously. (14) Mamassian, Pascal. “Impossible Shadows and the
Shadow Correspondence Problem.” Perception 33.11
(2004): 12791290
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (15) Tonello, G. “Seasonal Affective Disorder: Lighting
Research and Environmental Psychology.” Lighting
I thank my thesis advisor, Professor Alison Kwok, for her Research and Technology 40.2 (2008): 103110
guidance, suggestions, and continuous encouragement. I (16) Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. “Lighting
also express gratitude to Professor Howard Davis, who and Discomfort in the Classroom.” Journal of
offered an invitation to the UO Department of Architecture Environmental Psychology 29.1 (2009): 6375
Research Symposium in Fall 2012; Associate Professor (17) Adams, Leslie, and David Zuckerman. “The Effect of
Esther Hagenlocher, who provided her perspective on this Lighting Conditions on Personal Space Requirements.” The
topic; Professor Jenny Young, who critically reviewed the
Journal of General Psychology 118.4 (1991): 335340
research presentation and encouraged me with her interest;
(18) Elzeyadi, Ihab. “Design for Indoor Comfort: A
and Professor Nancy Cheng, who shared her ideas and
Systematic Model for Assessing Occupant Comfort in
knowledge about daylighting. Also, I extend my
Sustainable Office Buildings,” Proceedings of 27th National
appreciation to all the friends who offered their help, shared
Passive Solar Conference—SOLAR 2002 Reno, NV, June
their opinions, and volunteered precious time in this study.
15-20 (2002), CD, 485-498
(19) Veitch, Jennifer A. “Light, Lighting, and Health: Issues
8. REFERENCES
for Consideration.” Leukos 2.2 (2005): 8596
(20) Veitch, J. A. “Psychological Processes Influencing
(1) DiLaura, David L., et al. The Lighting Handbook:
Lighting Quality.” Journal of the Illuminating Engineering
Reference and Application. 10th ed. New York: Illuminating
Engineering Society of North America, 2011 Society 30.1 (2001): 124140
(2) Kwok, Alison G., and Walter T. Grondzik. The Green (21) Rydeen, James E., Paul W. Erickson, and James Lange.
Studio Handbook: Environmental Strategies for Schematic “Built for Brains.” Industrial Engineer 40.3/4 (2008): 3236
Design. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2007 (22) Christoph F. Reinhart, John Mardaljevic, and Zack
(3) Buildings Energy Data Book. 2011 Rogers. “Dynamic Daylight Performance Metrics for
<http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/ Sustainable Building Design.” Leukos 3.1 (2006): 731
ChapterIntro1.aspx> (23) Edwards, Brian W. “Sustainability as a Driving Force
(4) Schmid, Ilka. “Shadow Mages: Projecting Images in in Contemporary Library Design.” Library Trends 60.1
Public Space to Explore the Potential of Shadows for Open (2011): 190–214
Space Design.” Topos: The International Review of (24) Flynn, John E., Clyde Hendrick, Terry Spencer, and
Landscape Architecture and Urban Design 54 (2006): 5461 Osyp Martyniuk. “A Guide to Methodology Procedures of
(5) Tanizaki, Junichiro. In Praise of Shadows. New Haven, Measuring Subjective Impressions in Lighting.” Journal of
Conn: Leete’s Island Books, 1977 IES (1979): 95111