Vital Signs Case Study
ARCH 592: Environmental Controls Systems II

Café Paradiso
Eugene, Oregon
 

Vicki Merkel
Deonne Schoner

GTF:  Joe Snider

Data and Analysis

Once again, our hypothesis was  ...

During daylight hours customers avoid the darker rear area in favor of the strongly
daylit section and in the evening the preference switches to the lamplit rear area.
 


After spending many days and hours observing behavior, making notes and asking the question
... What are the top two or three reasons you chose to sit in this seat? ...
we found that our hypothesis was not to be proven absolutely correct.


 


Conversations with the owner and staff had led us to believe we were going to be able to confirm our hypothesis.  Without mentioning at first that we were focusing on lighting, we told them that our study had to do with where people chose to sit in the space and why?  They then offered their own observations that they see a correlation between where people sit and the lighting of the space.

The site was observed over a four day period at three different times of day.  Each observation was conducted for one hour.  Seats chosen by each customer were recorded and whenever possible each customer was asked for their reasons for choosing their particular seat.  Most customers were happy to answer our questions, however, some did choose not to participate in the study.

It was apparent after the first few visits that we had the right idea, but were too quick to assume that the lighting would play the major role in directing a person's choice of seating.  While the data that we collected has proven it to be an important factor, it is only one of many.  Other top responses to the proposed question were mood, activity, crowdedness, thermal comfort, seating comfort, observational advantage and sheer randomness.

Diagrams and data can be viewed by clicking here.


 
Introduction Methodology Data & Analysis Continue to
Conclusions		 Credits