Lighting for Clothing Shop

Changing Rooms
Samantha McNern

September 2006

Lighting for Clothing Shop

Changing Rooms

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thanks are given to the participants in the practical experiments:
Gillian McNern
Sue Morgan-Jones
Kaye Stevens
John Stevens
Rebecca May
David Smith
Emrys Jones
Jamie Corbidge

CONTENTS
Page

1 Abstract
1.1 The aim of this study
1.2 Main outcomes

2 Introduction
2.1 Review of current lighting research
2.2 Retail case study by Hera Lighting How lighting affects sales
2.3 Importance of lighting factors in fashion stores
2.4 Case study from my personal experience Selfridges Birmingham
(Lighting Designers: DHA Designs)
2.5. Lack of lighting research into the aesthetic effects of lighting on
Perception and behaviour
2.6 Scope of study

3 Research Question
3.1. Development of research question in the context of prior research
3.2. Audience for study
3.3. Statement of Research Question

4 Study methodology
4.1 Potential methods to answer research question
4.2 Method chosen and reasons for choice
4.3 How study was carried out
4.4.Volunteer selection
4.5 Reason for small number of lighting scenarios
4.6 Scenarios chosen and what each represents
4.7 Site Set-up
4.8. Scenario 1. Tungsten Halogen Down light (abbreviation: DL)
4.9. Scenario 2. Tungsten Halogen Adjustable spotlights (abbreviation: ADJ)
4.10. Scenarios 3. and 4. Warm Linear Fluorescent (abbreviation: WF)
and Cool Linear Fluorescent (abbreviation: CF)
4.11. Scenario 5. Daylight (abbreviation: DAY)
4.12..Questionnaire design
4.13.Questionnaire

6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
9
10
10
10
11
12
12
12
12
13
13
14
14
16
16
18
19
20
20

5 Results
5.1. Dates, weather and other conditions
5.2. Results Introduction
5.3 Quantitative results
5.4. Qualitative results table
6

Analysis
6.1. Analysis process and results
6.2. Interpretation of data by scenario (with reference to qualitative
comments made)
6.3. Interpretation of data for individual lighting elements
6.4. Comparison of overall ratings with ratings for individual lighting elements
6.5. Influence ratings preliminary indications
6.6. Order of preference and influence ratings by volunteer profile differences

7 Conclusions
7.1. Lighting scenario preferences
7.2. Influence rating
7.3. Aesthetic judgements ratings
7.4. Differences in volunteer profiles
7.5. Recommendations for changing room lighting design
7.6. Potential study improvements and recommendations for further research

23
23
23
23
24
27
27
32
33
33
33
34
35
35
35
36
36
36
37

8 References

39

9 Bibliography

40

1. Abstract
1.1 The aim of this study
This study set out to address the quality of lighting in clothing store changing rooms.
The aim was to identify how shoppers perceive common examples of existing
changing room lighting, whether improvements could be made and what these
improvements might be. The study was intended to act as a starting point for more
detailed research into lighting for specific products and markets. As such the range of
lighting scenarios and number of test subjects was kept to small number.
1.2 Main outcomes
The outcomes of the study provide many points to be investigated further. The study
suggests a single down light is perceived as unflattering by shoppers and that
directional spotlights were preferred. There was a preference shown for warm colour
temperatures of light but this was not universal so would need further clarification in
specific store settings. Although daylight was cited by many participants as good
lighting the overcast conditions were not universally popular suggesting that on
overcast days daylight alone is unlikely to be sufficient.

2 Introduction
2.1 Review of current lighting research
As far as I was able to ascertain no prior research appeared to have been undertaken (at the
time of this study) on changing room lighting specifically. However, the importance of
lighting in the retail environment is well established.
In an article for Mondo, Lighting Designer Mary Rushton-Beales describes how a small chain
of stores was able to increase their sales by making improvements to their lighting and colour
scheme7.
The Small Commercial Lighting Program (SCLP) is a collaboration between the Lighting
Research Centre and The New York State Energy Research and Development Agency who
promote effective, energy efficient lighting design. In their guidelines for retail lighting they
say that retail lighting should attract customers into your store, help them evaluate the
merchandise, and help your sales people complete each sale quickly and accurately. 8 They
further state that research has shown that lighting installations that are carefully designed
with these three factors in mind will actually increase retail sales. 8
Another lighting design advisory group, Designlights Consortium, have produced a series of
lighting Knowhow Guides and case studies which are recommended by the SCLP. The
Knowhow Guide on retail lighting advised that the selection of the right lighting can be a
major contribution to retail sales.10
These are just a few examples of the widely accepted relationship between improved retail
lighting and a likely increase in sales.
2.2 Retail case study by Hera Lighting How lighting affects sales
Although not related to clothing sales there is a piece of research that clearly shows the impact
of lighting in relation to retail sales. The study was recently commissioned in the United
States by Hera Lighting with marketing research company Merchant Mechanics at two stores
belonging to health supplement retailer General Nutrition Companies Inc.(GNC). The study
involved specific fixture lighting to end of aisle vitamin displays near the store entrances. The
study was carried out over two days with fixture lighting switched on one day and switched
off on the other day. The result was that GNC sold more than twice as much product from the
end-caps in the two days with the added illumination than in a comparable period without the
additional luminaires in place.3
2.3 Importance of lighting factors in fashion stores
Tim Jackson and David Shaw, lecturers at the London College of Fashion, list the following
amongst factors that characterise the most modern examples of good fashion store design:
Well lit, airy clean and uncluttered.advances in electric lighting create artificial daylight to

help enhance product.2 and within the same list Changing rooms are comfortable and more
user friendly and inviting this aids the selling process. 2
Respected American retail researcher, Paco Underhill, has made particular note of the
potential of changing room lighting. He writes The dressing room may be more important
than the floor of the store. .. The dressing room isnt just a convenience its more a selling
tool like a display or a window or advertising. 1 He goes on to cite a study for a major
clothing chain where the changing rooms where Stark cheesy little cubicles, a long corridor
of them, with a single, badly illuminated mirror down at the end of the row. 1 Another major
department store in New York with the most horrible dressing rooms Ive ever seen. Dirty,
shabby worn rugs. Harsh, unflattering lighting. 1 Underhills expert opinion on changing
room lighting is that The lighting should make everyone look like a million bucks. In fact,
the illumination should have several settings, so you could see what a colour would look like
in daylight, or under fluorescent lighting, or by candlelight. 1
2.4 Case study from my personal experience Selfridges Birmingham (Lighting
Designers: DHA Designs)
The changing room is where the decision to buy a garment is usually made which makes the
changing room environment very important. Shops go to great lengths to use good lighting on
the retail floor to display their goods effectively. It therefore follows that the part of the shop
where the decision to buy is made should be lit to at least the same standard in order to
display the clothing to the best of advantage and hopefully influence the shopper to proceed
with a purchase. I decided to look at changing room lighting because I dont think it is given
the same level of attention as the shop floor in the majority of shops I have been in. My
experience is supported by the views of Jackson, Shaw and Underhill in the previous section
My own personal view that the majority of clothing retailers have not considered changing
room lighting was further corroborated by experience of designing lighting for Selfridges new
flagship store in Birmingham whilst working for DHA Designs. We were given explicit
guidelines on the quality and quantity of the lighting required in the shop floors but were
given no instructions for lighting the changing rooms. Three separate architects were involved
in designing the three floors of clothing. In lighting discussions none of the architects had
considered the importance of the lighting in the changing rooms until I brought up the subject.
When the shop was completed I also investigated the haute couture areas which we had not
designed lighting for. I found that most of the changing rooms were lit very poorly often
relying on ambient light from main store lighting which in some cases was too far away to
light the changing room at all. As this is a new department store housing many of the biggest
retailers in the clothing industry I believe this gives a good overall example of the current
standards of clothes shop lighting in the United Kingdom
2.5. Lack of lighting research into the aesthetic effects of lighting on perception and
behaviour
In his paper Lighting research for interiors: the beginning of the end or the end of the
beginning P R Boyce concludes that ..The future of lighting research in interiors lies in a
move beyond visibility and visual discomfort to areas where lighting operates through the

messages it sends and hence how it affects mood and behaviour 4 He does accept that we
dont know how potent lighting can be and how persistent are its effects relative to all the
other factors that can change mood and motivation. 4 This indicates that care must be taken in
any study to try and separate the aesthetic effects of lighting from other environmental factors.
Jennifer Veitch and Guy Newsham have also noted the lack of research in this area and
comment that there is no consensus about what constitutes good lighting quality. 5 They
propose a behaviourally-based definitions of lighting quality 5 and go on to state a number of
behavioural requirements which the luminous environment 5 should aim to meet. Of these,
aesthetic judgement (assessments of the appearance of the space or lighting) 5 is shown to
have been studied very little. In their table of findings aesthetic judgement has only been
studied in relation to uniformity of lighting in a room and colour. By their assessment there
does not appear to have been any research undertaken to measure aesthetic judgement in
relation to a range of lighting variables including: luminance, illuminance, glare, control and
day lighting
These two papers demonstrate a clear need to further study how aesthetic judgements are
effected by the lit environment and how this might affect behaviour as a response.
2.6 Scope of study
The importance of fitting room lighting and the lack existing research support the need for
this particular study. This study will not it itself establish the precise financial relationship
between good changing room lighting and the willingness to purchase clothes. The intention
is to set a preliminary standard of what customers perceive to be good and bad changing room
lighting is in order for further studies to be carried out on the impact of improving changing
room lighting. This study will focus on the perceptions of UK shoppers only. It is envisioned
that the results may apply more widely.

3 Research Question
3.1. Development of research question in the context of prior research
The original aim was to identify shopper perceptions about the quality of existing changing
room lighting and whether improvements could be made. With so little existing research it
will be to start at a very simple level of questioning in order to ascertain any common
agreement on the quality of changing room lighting.
Underhill, Jackson and Shaw use a number a descriptive terms in identifying good and bad
retail lighting.
Terms referring to good lighting are: airy, artificial daylight, comfortable and inviting.
Underhill recommends the use of several settings and the broad suggestion of lighting that
makes everyone look a million bucks1.
Terms which refer to bad lighting are: stark, badly illuminated mirror, harsh and unflattering.
The research question which arises from this indicates a need for these lighting qualities to be
identified and rated
Another point about existing retail guidelines is the lack of any guidance on changing room
lighting. This research should provide a basis from which to begin offering standard lighting
advice for retail lighting designers. It will be useful to try and find one or more common
elements of aesthetic judgement which could potentially be more widely applied to changing
room lighting.
The lack of research into the effects of the aesthetics of lighting indicates that a need exists for
this area to be addressed in particular in this study. The research question is intended to
evaluate the potential for shopper behaviour to be affected by their aesthetic perceptions of the
changing room lighting.
3.2. Audience for study
The results of this study will be of interest to both retail designers and retailers themselves.
Lighting designers working in retail are the primary audience for this research as it will
provide objective evidence to support better lighting in fitting rooms. For other retail
designers, including interior designers, it offers an insight into the expectations of clothing
shoppers using the fitting rooms. For retailers themselves the aim is to convince them of the
potential for improving store image and ultimately increased sales through improved lighting
in the neglected area of changing rooms.

10

3.3. Statement of Research Question

Which lighting qualities are perceived as aesthetically good or bad by shoppers in changing
room lighting, are these qualities likely to influence their behaviour and are there any
common elements that are perceived as aesthetically good lighting which could be applied
more widely?

11

4 Study methodology
4.1 Potential methods to answer research question
Veitch and Newsham note that discussions about (lighting) quality are complicated by its
intangible nature5 that such intangible entities are constructs 5 and An important
first step in understanding a construct is to establish measurement rules. 5 They go on to
propose a number of requirements for the people using a space as definitions of lighting
quality. The requirements from their list relevant to changing room lighting are: post-visual
performance5 (including behavioural effects other than vision), 5 mood state 5 and
aesthetic judgement. 5 The three criteria lend them selves to different research approaches
To study the shopper behaviour post the visual experience the most important element would
be whether the individual went on to purchase the garment and how far this was related to the
visual environment. An inherent problem with this is that the purchase decision is likely to be
influenced by many other factors than just the lighting in the changing room. These may
include: fit, affordability and mood prior to entering the changing room,
4.2 Method chosen and reasons for choice
In his comments on the lack of research that has been done on the aesthetic effects Boyces
talks about effects of lighting on mood and behaviour
Mood and peoples and actual direct perception would be best studied in a discreet
environment. My concerns are that with a study based on site surveys would allow many
uncontrollable factors to affect the results. Boyce notes that in studying the effects of lighting
on the perceptual system lighting is just one amongst any possible factors, and it may be of
little importance.4 In order to focus in the specific effects of lighting factors alone it seemed
preferable to create a controllable environment in which all other factors than lighting were
the same. I therefore decided to focus on physical application of lighting technology in a
mock up rather than on purely surveying current perceptions.
I would interpret effects on behaviour in the context of this study as the likelihood of the
shopper buying a garment. This is something that would be investigated maybe better in a
further study once there is more data on preferred lighting irrespective of other environmental
factors.
4.3 How study was carried out
The experiment proceeded as follows. Volunteers took part in the experiment at different
prearranged times over the two days , 11-12 September 2005. Each volunteer was told that the
exercise was to assess different lighting scenarios and rate each one on a written
questionnaire. They we asked to write their name and occupation on the questionnaire and
given the opportunity to look over the questions in advance of entering the booth. Each
volunteer then entered the booth which was pre-set to the first lighting scenario. No time
limits were set to make their assessments. After the volunteer came out of the booth they filled

12

in the lighting scenario 1. questions while the next lighting scenario was being set up. Each
volunteer then repeated this exercise for each scenario. After the final scenario they were
asked to complete two questions final questions.
4.4.Volunteer selection
The volunteers were selected to provide a range of ages, genders and knowledge of lighting.
Of the eight test subjects genders were equally represented. Their ages ranged from 27 57
years of age. Assumptions of lighting knowledge were made on the basis of both their
occupations and of the volunteers own judgement of their lighting knowledge prior to taking
part. As this was planned as small exploratory study in the field of changing room the scope
was restricted to UK shoppers only. The ages, gender, occupations and assumed level of their
lighting knowledge are shown in table 1. below.
Table 1. Volunteer Profiles
Volunteer

Age

Gender

Occupation

50-59

Female

Interior Designer

30-39

Female

Bridal Wear Designer

40-49

Female

Adult Education Tutor

40-49

Male

Office Manager

50-59

Female

Photographer

40-49

Male

Event Organiser

20-29

Male

Production Manager

30-39

Male

Entertainment
Designer

Lighting

Assumed level of lighting

knowledge
Some
knowledge

primarily domestic
Some
knowledge

primarily in using of
daylight to view bridal
gowns
No
specific
lighting
knowledge assumed
No
specific
lighting
knowledge assumed
Knowledge of photography
lighting
No
specific
lighting
knowledge assumed
Some
knowledge

primarily
entertainment
lighting
Knowledge of entertainment
lighting

4.5 Reason for small number of lighting scenarios

The number of lighting scenarios chosen was kept deliberately small. The main reason for this
was to ease the task of making distinctions between scenes for the volunteers. A larger
selection of lighting scenarios would have allowed for more subtle differences to be tested but
would have made it harder for the volunteers to compare scenes. The results from this study
will indicate a range of possible reasons for each preference thereby providing material for
further research.

13

All the lighting scenarios differ in more than one parameter. As this is very much a first try at
finding out about customer lighting preferences for changing rooms it was considered more
important to identify a broad range of preferred parameters so a deeper level of differentiation
could then be tested in further studies. The lighting scenes differ in light output, direction,
level of diffusion, colour temperature (CT) and colour rendering quality (CRI).
4.6 Scenarios chosen and what each represents
In my experience, as both a shopper and lighting designer, a very common lighting solution
for changing room lighting is a single tungsten halogen down light so this was an obvious
lighting scenario to use. Another popular method is to use fluorescent tubes mounted
vertically at either side of the changing room mirror. As fluorescent lamps are available in a
range of colour temperatures I thought it would be a good idea to use two scenarios with this
set up using different colour temperatures to investigate how cool and warm lighting might be
perceived. It seemed appropriate to include a day lit scenario within the study. Daylight is
often noted anecdotally as ideal for retail and this is particularly backed up in a HeschongMahone study where 108 similar stores from a particular chain were compared. The only
major difference was that some of the stores had skylights while the rest had no direct
daylight illumination. They reported an increase in sales of 40% in the sky lit stores against
the non day lit.9
The final scenario is based on my own potential solution for changing room lighting. In this
scenario there are two directional lighting sources angled towards the shopper to provide good
three dimensional modelling. This approach is in agreement with the findings of SR
Mangums study of museum lighting which found that for full object lighting for complex
objects, using off-axis light sources, is preferred 6. I also used this lighting method for the
changing rooms in the third floor menswear department of Selfridges in Birmingham.
4.7 Site Set-up
The changing room mock up was sited in a residential setting. It was hoped that the
comfortable setting would provide informality to proceeding allowing the test subjects to
relax and voice their opinions of changing room lighting in a candid manner. All the subjects
were aware that the project was for a student thesis and not biased by sponsorship in any way.
The mocked-up changing room booth was positioned adjacent to north facing french doors to
provide a window for the day lighting scenario. The booths dimensions were 2m long, 1m
wide, 2m high. Each artificial lighting scenario was controlled from a switchable mains
socket. (Only one circuit was provided for the fluorescent scenarios as the warm and cool
coloured lamps were to be manually changed between tests.) The individual lighting scenarios
are detailed in the following sections. A full-length mirror was positioned on the westerly wall
of the changing room and the northerly side of the booth was curtained off so that the curtains
could be removed for the day lit scene.
As the volunteers entered the room they would first see a large table and seating and would
not see the interior of the booth until the first scenario had been set up, figure1.

14

Figure 1. Mock-up changing room set-up

15

4.8. Scenario 1. Tungsten Halogen Down light (abbreviation: DL)

Set up: A tungsten halogen down light was mounted at 900mm from the mirror end of the
booth to provide down lighting above the volunteer.
Luminaire: B&Q branded surface mounted 30 down light (with frosted diffuser)
Lamp: M111 halogen capsule 12V 35W G4
CCT: 3000K
CRI: 100%
Figure 2. Tugsten halogen down light set up

4.9. Scenario 2. Tungsten Halogen Adjustable spotlights (abbreviation: ADJ)

Set up: Two adjustable tungsten halogen spotlights were surface mounted to the ceiling in the
corners above the mirror. Each spot light was angled at 45 degrees above and from the centre
line towards the volunteer as shown in figure 3 and figure 4 below.
Luminaire: Wickes branded 35W mains tungsten halogen adjustable surface mounted spot
lights. Frosted lighting gel was placed in front of the fitting to reduce glare (LEE Filters
Hampshire Frost 253).
Lamp: 35W 240V GU10 38 reflector lamp
CCT: 3000K
CRI: 100%
Assuming the volunteer was standing at the centre of the changing room they would be lit
from a height of 1.59m down to floor level (in the plane perpendicular to the mirror). This is
based using a 38 reflector lamp with the fitting angled at 45 as follows:

16

0.85 tan 26 = 0.41m

0.85 tan 71 = 2.47m
2m 0.41m = 1.59m
Figure 3. Adjustable spotlight set up (Section perpendicular to mirror)
850

Figure 4. Adjustable spotlight set up (Section parallel to mirror)

17

4.10. Scenarios 3. and 4. Warm Linear Fluorescent (abbreviation: WF) and Cool Linear
Fluorescent (abbreviation: CF)
Set up: Scenarios 3 and 4 both used the same lighting position. Fluorescent battens were
mounted vertically to either side of the mirror. Warm and cool coloured fluorescent tubes were
interchanged between these two scenarios. Time was allowed for the fluorescent lighting
scenarios to reach full brightness between each test.
Luminaire: B&Q branded 18W Fluorescent batten. Opal lighting gel was placed in front of the
fitting to provide a diffuse lighting source (LEE Filters White Diffusion 216).
Scenario 3. Warm Fluorescent
Lamp: GE 18W Triphosphor coated linear fluorescent
CCT: 3000K
CRI: 90%
Scenario 4. Cool Fluorescent
Lamp: Osram 18W Halophosphor coated linear fluorescent
CCT: 3500K
CRI: 80%
Figure 4. Linear fluorescent set up

18

4.11. Scenario 5. Daylight (abbreviation: DAY)

Set up: In this scenario all artificial lighting sources were switched off. Daylight came from a
French doors to the right hand side of the volunteer to emulate full height glazing. The
window provided northerly daylight. This was chosen so that direct sunlight was not a factor.
CCT:
CRI:

6500K
100%

Figure 4. Daylight set up

19

4.12..Questionnaire design
The primary objective of the questionnaire was to capture the volunteers perception of the
aesthetic quality of the lighting and their appearance under each scenario. As the study is
intended as a first step towards measuring potential post changing room behaviour (i.e.
likelihood of purchase) it was important to include a preliminary question to gauge whether
the volunteers believed their purchase decision would be affected by the lighting. At the end
of the questionnaire the subjects were asked how influential they thought the changing room
lighting would be in their purchase decision.
As the intention was to search for measurable data that could be applied more widely the
questionnaire was largely quantitative. However, as aesthetic judgements are potentially quite
subjective, it was necessary to include a platform for the volunteers to express themselves in
qualitative terms. These comments would then be used provide context to the numeric values
given and to pick up any unexpected perceptions that might suggest further avenues for
research.
Any recommendations from this study would need to include guidelines on specific lighting
parameters. These might include, colour rendering standards, colour temperatures, angles of
directional lighting and/or use of diffuse sources. Colour rendering is particularly important
for making judgements about textiles so it was decided to make one of the questions about
perceived colour rendering quality. The other lighting aspects are potentially harder to
separate so the questions are divided into two aesthetic qualities of lighting. The volunteers
were asked how flattering the lighting was as an assessment of their own appearance under
the lighting conditions. They were then asked how pleasing they found the lighting as a
measure of their overall aesthetic judgement of the lit scene. These three areas of questioning
were intended to be analysed in comparison with subjects overall preference ratings at the end
of the experiments.
4.13.Questionnaire
Questions 1.-3. ask for quantitative measures of the volunteers perception of the aesthetic
qualities of the lighting and question 4. provides the volunteers with an opportunity to qualify
their previous answers in the form of qualitative comments. Question a. at the experiments
asked for a further overall measurement for comparison with the individual answers to
questions 1-3. The final question b. is to provide possible insight into the potential for
changing room lighting to affect shopper behaviour.
After each lighting scenario each volunteer was asked to answer the following:
Please give ratings for the following of: Very Good, Good, Poor, Very Poor
1. How well could you see the actual colour of the garments under this lighting?
2. How flattering did you find this lighting?
3. How pleasing did you find this lighting overall?
4. Please comment on what you did and/or didnt like about this lighting.
At the end of the experiment each volunteer was asked to answer the following:

20

a. Please rate the lighting in each scenario in order of preference? (1-5)

b. Having tried on these garments in different lighting conditions, how much do you think the
changing room lighting would influence whether or not you chose to buy a garment in a
shop? Very influential (1), Somewhat influential (2), Not very influential (3), Would make no
difference (4)

21

5 Results
5.1. Dates, weather and other conditions
The experiment was carried out over two days, 11th and 12th September 2004.
On both days the weather was dry but mostly overcast with only some blue patches of sky so
daylight was not bright. As the mock-up changing room was positioned next to with a
northerly aspect the daylight scenario had a markedly duller appearance within the changing
room when compared with the electric light sources. This was reflected in comments made by
most of the volunteers and is likely to have affected the results for the day lit scene.
5.2. Results Introduction
After the questionnaires had been completed the responses were tabulated. The qualitative
statements made in response to question 4. were tabulated separately. As questions 1.-3. were
designed to be compared with the overall preferences stated in question a. an additional
column was added to the table giving an mean average of the responses of questions 1.-3 per
scenario each volunteer had rated. These results as given in Table 2 below.
5.3 Quantitative results
Table 2. Quantitative Results
(The times of day that each volunteer experienced the day lit scenario is noted)
Scenario abbreviations:
DL
Scenario 1. - Down light
ADJ Scenario 2. - Adjustable spotlights
WF
Scenario 3. Warm Linear Fluorescent
CF
Scenario 4. - Cool Linear Fluorescent
DAY Scenario 5. - Daylight
Volunteer
1
11/9/04

2
11/9/04

Scenario

Q1.Colour
Rendering
DL
3
ADJ
2
WF
3
CF
4
DAY 13.45 3

Q2.How
Flattering
3
2
3
4
2

Q3.How
Pleasing
4
2
2
4
3

Mean Q1. - 3 Qa.Order of Qb.Level of

Preference Influence
3.33
5
2
2.00
1
2.67
2
4.00
4
2.67
3

DL
ADJ
WF
CF

2
1
2
2

2
1
3
3

2
1
2
3

2.00
1.00
2.33
2.67

3
1
4
5

DAY 14.30 2

2.00

22

Volunteer

Scenario

3
11/9/04

DL
ADJ
WF
CF

Q2.How
Flattering
3
2
2
1

Q3.How
Pleasing
2
2
2
1

Mean Q1. - 3 Qa.Order of Qb.Level of

Preference Influence
2.33
4
2
1.67
3
1.67
2
1.00
1

DAY 15. 50 3

2.33

4
11/9/04

DL
ADJ
WF
CF
DAY 16.10

3
2
3
2
2

3
2
3
1
2

3
2
3
1
1

3.00
2.00
3.00
1.33
1.67

5
2
4
1
3

5
12/9/04

DL
ADJ
WF
CF

3
2
2
1

3
1
1
3

3
1
1
3

3.00
1.33
1.33
2.33

5
2
3
4

DAY 10.05 1

1.33

DL
ADJ
WF
CF

2
1
3
4

3
2
2
4

3
2
2
4

2.67
1.67
2.33
4.00

4
2
3
5

DAY 10.20 2

2.00

DL
ADJ
WF
CF

3
1
3
2

4
3
2
2

4
2
3
2

3.67
2.00
2.67
2.00

5
1
3
2

DAY 11.15 2

2.33

DL
ADJ
WF
CF

2
2
2
3

3
2
2
3

3
2
2
3

2.67
2.00
2.00
3.00

4
1
2
3

DAY 12.00 2

2.00

6
12/9/04

7
12/9/04

8
12/9/04

Q1.Colour
Rendering
2
1
1
1

23

5.4. Qualitative results table

The qualitative responses to question 4 are listed in Table 3. below
Table 3. Additional comments made by volunteers to Question 4
Scene

Volunteer

Comments

DL

Drained skin colour and made me look unwell. Showed reds better than greens.

DL

Lighting was OK.

DL

DL

Quite soft (liked) but shadows cast (might just be set-up rather than lighting
itself.
Seemed like one overhead spot, very shadowy.

DL

DL

Harsh shadows from overhead light. Colour not accurate darker than in
daylight. Poor visibility.
Level of overall light inadequate, also top down meant shadows.

DL

Very shadowy

DL

Too many shadows.

ADJ

Some reds dulled, greens clearer than previous lighting scenario.

ADJ

Lighting was much better (than halogen downlight) and clearer.

ADJ

ADJ

Brighter than previous (halogen downlight) which gave clarity. Clarity great for
clothes / not quite as flattering when youre past 40.
Much warmer, friendly. Garments looked better.

ADJ

ADJ

ADJ

More overall light coverage. Colour appreciation more accurate but obviously
darker than daylight conditions due to colour temperature of light.
Better overall level of illumination (than halogen downlight). Shadow problem
much reduced and a reasonable approximation to sunshine.
Slight change of focus would improve. (tall volunteer, over 6)

ADJ

Soft even lighting good for face lighting and garment colour definition.

24

Scene

Volunteer

Comments

WF

Vivid colours enhanced, deeper colours dulled. Skin tone reasonable, but flat.

WF

WF

WF

These lights were slightly better than (cool fluorescent) but still not bright
enough for overall look.
Clarity good but a bit harsh. On an individual level I dont like tube lighting as I
tend towards migraine and this seems to be one of my triggers. This however
seems slightly less glaring than many changing rooms I have been in.
Although subtle found a little too dim and false for observing materials.

WF

WF

WF

Slightly better than (adjustable spotlights) overall. Colour different, better. Not
the most flattering light on the face but good on the body.
Better than (cool fluorescent) but I still would never consider buying clothes in
this lighting.
Too yellow. Fitting needed to be longer.

WF

Tone good. Lighting a bit low in position.

CF

Colours looked unreal. Skin tone awful.

CF

CF

These lights detracted from your face and you need to be able to see yourself
from head to toe in your garment.
Clear, Bright but not too harsh.

CF

Liked the diffused effect probably more like bright daylight conditions.

CF

CF

Made me look ill. Colour of light greener (than warm fluorescent) but better
rendition of colour in pink fabric.
Low level of overall light plus colouring made very flat.

CF

A little bit harsh tonally. Fitting needed to be longer.

CF

Too low but soft good in combination with other lighting. Tone too cold.

25

Scene

Volunteer

Comments

DAY

Light was a bit dim as sky outside cloudy.

DAY

DAY

DAY

DAY

If daylight was able to be all round and not just from one angle this light would
be best because its usually how you are viewed by people.
Its how you expect to see yourself. Too diffused to identify colours well as not
full light only that coming from an outside source.
Great when judging certain types of garments, but synthetic lighting my be better
other situations.
Needed to be brighter, but happy with it.

DAY

DAY

Dull overcast day. North facing window. Daylight is what we are accustomed to
it therefore is the norm against which we judge other lighting.
(no comments made)

DAY

Good visibility for garments. Not quite bright enough.

General

General

Light needs would differ depending on whether clothes were for daytime or
evening wear. Ideal would be a range of lighting options in the changing room.
I use daylight and supplement with daylight bulbs on dull days for bridal gowns.

General

General

General

General

General

General

Even worst lighting (halogen downlight) better than most changing rooms I have
been in.
Lighting may need to be different for different occasions.
I always look in daylight if I can anyway. Better light was for colour worse it
seemed for actual perception of yourself.
(no comments made)
Issue with angled lighting with people of different heights. 2 nd and 3rd scenarios
together would be good (halogen spotlights and warm fluorescents).
(no comments made)

26

6 Analysis
6.1. Analysis process and results
To begin the analysis, mean averages were taken of the overall preference ratings in order to
identify the overall preferred lighting scenario. Mean averages were also taken of the specific
lighting elements rated in questions 1-3, Colour rendering, how flattering and how pleasing
the lighting was perceived to be. These results are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Overall ratings for each scenario
Scenario
DL
ADJ
WF
CF
DAY

Colour
Rendering
2.50
1.50
2.38
2.38
2.13

How
Flattering
3.00
1.88
2.25
2.63
1.75

How
Pleasing
3.00
1.75
2.13
2.63
2.25

Average
overall
2.83
1.71
2.25
2.54
2.04

Order
Preference
4.38
1.63
2.88
3.13
3.00

The next objective was to gauge how common the responses were within the group using
variance analysis over the range of answers given for each scenario by the different
volunteers. The variance analysis was done using the ANOVA method 11 to find Standard
Deviation (SD) for each scenario.
Further analysis was needed to compare the answers to the questions on the specific lighting
elements with the overall preferences made. This was again addressed using the variance
analysis to see whether there was any correlation between the answers to questions 1-3 with
the overall preference ratings. The results of the standard deviation (SD) calculations are
given in table 5.
There was considerably more agreement between the volunteers on some of the lighting
scenarios than others. Standard deviation between results was small for warm fluorescent
tubes and for both the down light and angled spotlight tungsten halogen fittings. The standard
deviations showed a much wider variation in responses for the cool fluorescent tubes and for
daylight.
By measuring variants we can get an idea as to how cohesive the answers are and whether
they are actually in accord or whether there is too much variance in views to really use it as a
judgement of what is common. What are needed from the analysis are the clearest points of
agreement. For example, the adjustable down lights were widely preferred. By contrast, the
fluorescent lighting caused a wide range of reactions, particularly the cool fluorescent,
indicating a range of perceptions of different people. It may be down to a matter of taste and
therefore quite a volatile option for changing room lighting design.

27

Table 4. Standard deviation (SD) calculations

Volunteer

Scene

Colour
Rendering

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

DL
DL
DL
DL
DL
DL
DL
DL

3
2
2
3
3
2
3
2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

ADJ
ADJ
ADJ
ADJ
ADJ
ADJ
ADJ
ADJ

2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
WF

3
2
1
3
2
3
3
2

Avg.

2.500

1.500

2.375

SD

How
Flattering

0.535

3
2
3
3
3
3
4
3

0.535

2
1
2
2
1
2
3
2

0.744

3
3
2
3
1
2
2
2

Avg.

3.000

1.875

2.250

SD

How
Pleasing

0.535

4
2
2
3
3
3
4
3

0.641

2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2

0.707

2
2
2
3
1
2
3
2

Avg.

3.000

1.750

2.125

SD

Average
overall

0.756

3.33
2.00
2.33
3.00
3.00
2.67
3.67
4.86

0.463

2.00
1.00
1.67
2.00
1.33
1.67
2.00
3.52

0.641

2.67
2.33
1.67
3.00
1.33
2.33
2.67
4.03

Avg.

3.107

1.898

2.503

SD

Order
Preference

Avg.

SD

0.884

5
3
4
5
5
4
5
4

4.375

0.744

0.745

1
1
3
2
2
2
1
1

1.625

0.744

0.823

2
4
2
4
3
3
3
2

2.875

0.835

28

Volunteer

Scene

Colour
Rendering

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

CF
CF
CF
CF
CF
CF
CF
CF

4
2
1
2
1
4
2
3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY

3
2
3
2
1
2
2
2

Avg .

2.375

2.125

SD

How
Flattering

1.188

4
3
1
1
3
4
2
3

0.641

2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2

Avg.

2.625

1.750

SD

How
Pleasing

1.188

4
3
1
1
3
4
2
3

0.463

3
2
3
1
2
2
3
2

Avg.

2.625

2.250

SD

Average
overall

1.188

4.00
2.67
1.00
1.33
2.33
4.00
2.00
5.46

0.707

2.67
2.00
2.33
1.67
1.33
2.00
2.33
1.57

Avg.

2.849

1.988

SD

Order
Preference

Avg.

SD

1.521

4
5
1
1
4
5
2
3

3.125

1.642

0.448

3
2
5
3
1
1
4
5

3.000

1.604

29

The mean averages and variance for the specific lighting elements were compared with the
overall preference ratings for each scenario to find out whether there was a match between the
scenarios given the highest and lowest ratings in questions 1-3 and the overall ratings given
for each scenario.
Table 4. Overall ratings for each scenario
Order of ratingsColour
(1
Rendering
highest)
1
ADJ
2
DAY
3
WF/CF
4
5
DL

How
Flattering

How
Pleasing

Average
overall

Order
Preference

DAY
ADJ
WF
CF
DL

ADJ
WF
DAY
CF
DL

ADJ
DAY
WF
CF
DL

ADJ
WF
DAY
CF
DL

The order of preference ratings were further divided but different elements of the volunteers
profiles; age, gender and assumed level of lighting knowledge. These are shown in graphs 13.
Graph 1. Comparison of order of preference ratings by gender

Graph 2. Comparison of order of preference ratings by age

Graph 2. Comparison of order of preference ratings by level of lighting knowledge

31

Finally, the influence ratings were compared with the first preferences given and the volunteer
profile differences to discover whether any of these factors appeared to be related to the
influence rating stated. These are shown in table 5.
Table 5. Influence rating in comparison with first preference given and profile factors
Influence
rating
1
2

First preference

Gender

2 ADJ / 1 DAY
2 ADJ / 2 CF /
1 DAY

1 male/2 female
3 male/2 female

Age
1 20s/ 1 30s /
1 50s
1 20s/ 1 30s /
1 40s/ 150s

Assumed level of lighting

knowledge
2
knowledgeable/
1 some knowledge
1 knowledgeable/ 1 some
knowledge/ 2 none

6.2. Interpretation of data by scenario (with reference to qualitative comments made)

Adjustable spot lights
The tungsten halogen spotlights were given high positive results and were chosen as first or
second choice overall by the volunteers. Comments made by the volunteers indicate that this
lighting scenario was preferred because it seemed to be brighter, Better overall level of
illumination and made clothing more visible, gave clarity. Yet, there was one issue with a
tall volunteer who found these fittings where not focused appropriately for him. This problem
would be improved though with a higher mounting position which would be feasible in most
standard booths.
Down lights
The tungsten halogen down light, by contrast, received negative results from all the
volunteers. Comments on this scenario such as harsh shadows and drained skin colour
show that it was judged as shadowy and unflattering. One factor which might improve the
effect of down lighting is ceiling height. The ceiling height in the mock-up fitting room is
probably lower than average at 2m and the shadowing effects might be improved to some
degree with a higher ceiling.
Warm and cool fluorescent
The warm fluorescent (3000K) was marked as medium preference by most of the volunteers
with comments ranging from soft even lighting to too yellow indicating a certain
ambivalence. However, it came out as second overall. This was partly because some of the
volunteers showed a preference for the cool fluorescent (3500K). But, others gave a markedly
negative response to the cooler colour temperature which meant that cool fluorescent came
out as fourth overall. Those who liked the cool fluorescent appeared to associate the cooler
colour with daylight giving comments such as clear, bright but not too harsh. Those who
disliked the cool fluorescent commented on the green tone of the light e.g. colour of light
greener and did not give it a similar rating to daylight.
Daylight
The variation in responses to the daylight scenario may have been due to a number of factors.
The primary issues with the daylight in this experiment were that it was only provided from
one side of the volunteer, that levels were poor overall (due to mainly overcast conditions) and

32

that the source was a north facing window so no sunlight penetrated the space. Several of the
volunteers with knowledge of day lighting (bridal wear designer and photographer) gave
daylight a higher rating. This may reflect an expectation of daylight being better as their
comments show a generalised preference for daylight rather specific reference to the day light
on the day. For example, Its how you expect to see yourself and needed to be brighter, but
happy with it. Daylight received an average rating overall which in part may reflect the
issues above. However, this also shows the overall difficultly in using daylight in a changing
room. Daylight conditions do of course differ greatly and a changing room may be located to
the North of a retail location. This suggests that simulated daylight may be preferable to actual
daylight for changing rooms.
6.3. Interpretation of data for individual lighting elements
Colour rendering
Responses to the question of colour rendering are particularly interesting because they did not
necessarily coincide with the stated colour rendering qualities of the light sources. Low light
levels (tungsten halogen down light and daylight) appear to have been perceived as reducing
colour rendering despite the fact that both sources are considered to have a CRI (Colour
Rendering Index) of 100%. The cooler colour temperature halophosphor coated fluorescent
(CRI 80%) was perceived as providing better colour rendering than the warmer colour
temperature triphosphor coated fluorescent (CRI 90%) despite the higher CRI rating of the
warmer fluorescent.
Ratings for how flattering and how pleasing
The major difference between these two criteria is in the ratings given for daylight. Daylight
was judged to be the most flattering but only rated average on the pleasing scale. The
intention of these two questions in the study was to separate the subjects assessment of their
own appearance (how flattering) from their aesthetic judgement of the space (how pleasing).
This variation indicates that the volunteers judged their own appearance under daylight as
good but that this did not necessarily mean they liked the lit space.
6.4. Comparison of overall ratings with ratings for individual lighting elements
Interestingly, overall order of preference ratings matches the order of ratings for how pleasing
the lighting was but not how flattering it was or the perception of colour rendering. This may
suggest that in rating the scenarios overall the volunteers were influenced more by their view
of the lit space rather than the suitability of the lighting for making judgements about
purchasing clothes. This could be related to the format of the experiment itself but might also
suggest that the purchase decision would be more influenced by how pleasing the changing
room lighting is perceived to be than how well the shopper can see themselves and the
clothing. In this case, existing standards of good retail lighting could simply be extended into
the changing room in order.
6.5. Influence ratings preliminary indications
The point of most significance is that of the 4 responses available (Very influential (1),
Somewhat influential (2), Not very influential (3), Would make no difference (4)) all of the

33

volunteers rated the level of influence on the purchase decision as 1 or 2. This gives a
preliminary indication that the potential buying behaviour of the volunteers might be altered
by the perceived quality of the changing room lighting.
6.6. Order of preference and influence ratings by volunteer profile differences
These divisions are of limited value because the test group was small so sub-divisions of the
group are unlikely to be representational of general trends. However, with this proviso, any
trends indicated could provide questions for further study.
The only significant difference between men and women was in their responses to the cool
fluorescent scenario. Male volunteers showed a higher preference for the cool fluorescent than
females. The comments suggest that this could be due to more males associating the cool
colour with daylight, e.g. probably more like daylight and females considering the effect on
skintone and garment colour characterized by comments such as colours looked unreal,
skintone awful. Those who gave cool fluorescent as higher rating gave a lower rating, on
average to the overall importance of lighting in deciding whether to buy a garment. On
average, the also men gave a slightly lower rating for the overall importance of lighting in the
buying process. l
Age did not correlate in a clear way preference ratings for any of the artificial lighting
scenarios. However, preference for the day lit scenario did show and increase with age (graph
2). There could be many reasons which would warrant further study. It does indicate that
stores should consider the age of their customers and maybe provide natural daylight where
shoppers are likely to be more mature.
This factor is the least reliable in the study as the judgement of lighting knowledge was
subjective. The level of lighting knowledge did not relate in a clear way to the scenario
preferences although those who gave a rating of 1 (very influential) for the potential influence
rating did tend to have more lighting knowledge.
It is perhaps not surprising though that those who know more about lighting believe it
influences them more than those less consciously aware of the lighting. The influence rating is
a subjective measurement so cannot be used to accurately predict actual shopper behaviour.
Nevertheless, the indication is that changing room lighting is at least believed by shoppers to
influence their buying behaviour.

34

7 Conclusions
7.1. Lighting scenario preferences
The clearest results in this study related to the tungsten halogen fittings. The primary
preference for the adjustable halogen spotlights was quite clear. This would therefore be a
recommended approach to changing room lighting. Some care would need to be taken when
using spot lights to calculate the correct position and beam angles to provide head to toe
lighting for various heights of shoppers.
It was also clear that a tungsten halogen down light, which is currently used in a large number
of fitting rooms, was disliked by all. As this is a common approach changing room lighting
this result indicates a genuine need for a store designers to consider changing room more
carefully.
Warm colour temperature fluorescent tubes were judged favourably on the whole but there
was much wider discrepancy regarding cool fluorescent lighting. This suggests that it would
be safer to use warmer colour temperatures in fluorescent installations rather than risk
customer having a strongly negative reaction to the lighting.
Daylight did not fair as well as might be expected. This is likely to be because of the poor
weather conditions in this study. The overcast conditions led to some interesting dichotomies
between several of the subjects preferences stated verbally for daylight with their actual
experience of viewing themselves under day lit conditions.
The use of daylight is particularly important because daylight is likely to be given a very
favourable view in general discussion. But the reality is that daylight is not necessarily what
people actually expect nor how they most enjoy seeing themselves. Partly because daylight
conditions may not be optimum, they may not fit with our idea of a lovely sunny day as being
ideal viewing conditions. On reflection it is not surprising that a cloudy grey overcast day
scored low as a preferred lighting scenario. It is much more likely that somebody would reach
for the electric switch and put artificial lighting on. I think theres an interesting conscious
judgement often made about the value of day lighting compared with artificial lighting. There
is a philosophical perception of daylight as being pure, natural and best. There is much more
scope for research beyond this study into how well natural daylight meets with peoples actual
lighting preferences in a range of applications including retail.
7.2. Influence rating
A direct question on how likely a shopper might think they are to be influenced cannot
accurately predict the shoppers actual behaviour. However, it is significant that all the
volunteers believed that the quality of the changing room lighting would affect their decision
to purchase. Further research on actual shopper behavioural responses to changing room
lighting would be necessary to gauge how accurate this belief is.

35

7.3. Aesthetic judgements ratings

The aesthetic appeal of the lit space may be more conducive to making a sale than the specific
modelling and colour rendering qualities that might be considered technically relevant for
changing room lighting. This is an intriguing out come which suggests that rather than
providing guidance on specific lighting elements retail lighting designer should be advised to
focus on making the lighting in the changing room area pleasing. This may be as simple as
replicating the shop floor lighting in the changing room area
7.4. Differences in volunteer profiles
Indications by aspects of the volunteer profiles are limited by the low number of participants.
However, there were a few results which might merit further research.
The only major gender difference was in response to the cool fluorescent lighting scenario. In
a study of changing room lighting for different types of clothing stores it would be useful to
confirm whether this was a general difference that might affect the design decisions made
male and female changing rooms.
The results by age did show a correlation between increased preference for daylight with age.
The reason for this would need more thorough investigation but is does suggest that natural
daylight should be recommended for stores selling clothes to older shoppers.
The other area which is quite hard to qualify is the extent to which people who have lighting
knowledge applied their academic knowledge as opposed to their own personal perceptions to
their judgements. But the lack of any correlations between levels of lighting knowledge and
preferred lighting scenarios may mean that shoppers actual response to the changing room
lighting is based on their sub-conscious aesthetic perceptions rather than any conscious
assessment of the lighting technically.
7.5. Recommendations for changing room lighting design
Although many of the indications provided by this study would need to be studied and
verified in more detailed research there are a number of clear results that can be put forward
as recommendations for changing room lighting.
The following guidelines are intended for lighting designers and other professional involved
in retail design.
These lighting approaches are recommended in designing changing room lighting:
Adjustable spot lighting from the corners above the mirror is recommended.
However, these must positioned carefully to light customers of various heights.

36

Use daylight where possible, especially for older shoppers, but only use in
conjunction with supplementary artificial day lighting to compensate for dull and
overcast weather conditions.
Fluorescent lighting could be suitable for some changing rooms but perceptions of
fluorescent lighting differ widely. Warmer colour temperatures are less likely to elicit
a strongly negative response than cooler colour temperatures.
Designing the lighting to make the changing room aesthetically pleasing may be more
important than purely designing for high technical standards of colour rendering and
modelling.
These lighting approaches should be avoided in designing changing room lighting:
A centrally positioned halogen down light is disliked by customers and perceived as
providing poor lighting.
Fluorescent lighting using cool temperatures is strongly disliked by some shoppers
although it is viewed very favourably by some. Therefore, cool fluorescent lighting
should be avoided unless supported by further research applicable to specific store
type.
Reliance on natural daylight exclusively is not recommended. The imagined qualities
of daylight are sometimes better than reality so real daylight may not meet customer
expectations of pleasant natural light in all weather conditions
7.6. Potential study improvements and recommendations for further research
1. Perceptions of day lighting are clearly complex and weather conditions are uncontrollable.
It would be better to study the perception of day lit changing rooms specifically rather that
simply including daylight as a single variable. Study of the perceptions of daylight should
focus specifically on natural light only in order to assess the many conscious and subconscious factors that might affect the test subjects perception.
2. A number of studies comparing only individual characteristics would allow for more
accurate reasons for lighting preferences. The small scale of the volunteer group in this study
inevitably meant that few conclusions could be drawn on different shopper characteristics.
3. Changing rooms come is a range of sizes and layouts so it may be useful to compare similar
lighting in different locations to define accurate lighting design criteria such as beam angles
and lux level recommendations.
4. A wider range of fitting types would give more complete understanding of precisely what
was favoured. Studies to identify preferences by single parameter (e.g. Preferred angle of
incidence of adjustable spot lights) would provide more accurate details on precise lighting
design recommendations.

37

5. No distinction was made in this study of type of store and merchandise. If studies were
segmented by clothing type (e.g., day/eve wear) and customer base (e.g. Age./gender) this
would allow for different recommendations dependent on individual retailer markets.
6. A fully costed study to investigate the financial benefits of increased sales against the cost
of specialised lighting in fitting rooms would begin to answer the question of how much effect
lighting aesthetics actually have on potential shopper purchasing behaviour.

38

8 References:
1. Underhill P, Why We Buy The Science of Shopping pp 170-172 (London: The Orion
Publishing Group 1999)
2. Jackson T, Shaw D, Mastering Fashion Buying and Merchandising Management pp 171172 (Macmillan 2001)
3. Hera Lighting shows lighting as a retail moneymaker, Design and display ideas (ddi
magazine) (1 March 2003)
4. Boyce P R, Lighting research for interiors: the beginning of the end or the end of the
beginning, Lighting Research and Technology, 36,4 (2004)
5 Veitch J A and Newsham G R, Determinants of lighting quality I: State of Science, Paper
presented at the 1996 Annual Conference of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North
America, Cleveland, Ohio, 5-7 August, (1996)
6. Mangum S R, Effective Constrained Illumination of Three-Dimensional, Light Sensitiv
Objects, Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society, (1998)
7. Rushton-Beales M, Good Lighting Means Good Sales, Mondo Arc, (2005)
8. Learn About Lighting, Effective, Energy-Efficient Lighting for Retail Sores, Small
Commercial Lighting Program, (http://sclp.lightingresearch.org/retailresources.asp)
9. Heschong-Mahone Group, Skylighting and Retail Sales: An investigation into the
relationship between daylighting and human performance, detailed report for Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, Fairoaks, California. (1999)
10 Designlights Consortium, Small Retail Lighting Knowhow,
(www.designlights.org/downloads/retail_guide.pdf)
11.ANOVA method courtesy of Jim Deacon,
(http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/bto/statistics/tress6.html)

The

university

of

Edinburgh,

39

9 Bibliography
Veitch J A and Newsham G R, Determinants of lighting quality II: Research and
Recommendations, Paper presented at the 104 th Annual Convention of the American
Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 12 August (1996)
Openheim A N, Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement, (Pinter
Publishers Ltd 1992)
Marshall M, Research Methods How to design and conduct a successful project, (How To
Books 1997)
Cuttle C, Lighting by Design, (Architectural Press 2003)
Hopkins R G, Architectural Physics: Lighting, (Her Majestys Stationary Office 1963)

40