4.6 Article

Assessing the pedestrian response to urban outdoor lighting: A full-scale laboratory study

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 13, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204638

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swedish energy agency [2012-00-3180]
  2. INTERREG-project Lighting Metropolis - European Regional Development Fund [NYPS 20200430]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identifies and applies methods for evaluating the human response to pedestrian lighting applications intended for future use by the municipality of Malmo, Sweden. The methods employed provide a supplementary perspective to that given by the photometric properties of the lighting applications. The study involved 89 participants from two age groups (Young: N: 43, 19-31 yrs.; Elderly: N: 46, 62-77 yrs.). Data were collected in a full-scale laboratory using a mock-up pedestrian pathway. Three lighting applications (one ceramic metal halide and two LED) were presented and the participants' behavior (walking speed), perception (ability to perform visual tasks-recognize facial expressions, detect obstacles, read street signpost), affective response, and evaluation of the lighting quality were assessed. The three lighting applications significantly differed with regard to the human response. The facial expression recognition distance, sign reading distance and the obstacle detection task, along with the evaluation of lighting quality and level of arousal, distinguished one of the LEDs (Correlated Color Temperature: 3810, Color Rendering Index: 75, Scotopic/Photopic ratio: 1.48) from the other two lighting applications-the participants performed better on the visual tasks, and the lighting was perceived as brighter, more arousing and less pleasant. Methods to capture human perception, evaluation and behavior in relation to outdoor lighting, provide a valuable perspective that should be systematically applied when municipalities consider different pedestrian lighting applications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据