Journal of Environmental Psychology (1998) 18, 175185 1998 Academic Press Article No.

ps980084

0272-4944/98/020175+11$30.00/0

ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
TASK TYPE, POSTERS, AND WORKSPACE COLOR ON MOOD, SATISFACTION, AND PERFORMANCE
NANCY J. STONE AND ANTHONY J. ENGLISH Department of Psychology, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, U.S.A.

Journal of

Abstract Task type, poster presence, and workspace color were varied to determine their effects on mood, satisfaction, and performance. Students (n=112) performed either a low or high demand task in a blue or red workspace, without or with a scenic poster. Only hostility was significantly affected by task type. Satisfaction and performance were not significantly affected by posters or workspace color, although performance decreased for the high demand tasks and increased for the low demand tasks over time. Posters made the workplace more pleasant, but also increased perceived task demand. Perceived task demand was also marginally related to workplace color. Perceived task demand may moderate the effects of posters and workplace color on mood and other perceptions. Other data support the notion that cool colors are calming and warm colors are stimulating.
1998 Academic Press

Introduction Certain work environments are designed as partitioned or landscaped open-plan offices. Although open-plan offices increase communication, they tend to be noisy and distracting (McCarrey et al., 1974; Hedge, 1982), to decrease employee satisfaction and internal motivation (Brooks & Kaplan, 1972; Oldham & Brass, 1979), and to decrease productivity (Hedge, 1982). Depending on the task, decreases in satisfaction as well as changes in mood in partitioned open-plan offices may be due to windowlessness (Collins, 1975; Stone & Irvine, 1993, 1994) and/or the color of the work environment (Kwallek et al., 1988). The color of the work environment may also affect performance (Kwallek et al., 1988; Kwallek & Lewis, 1990). Therefore, in a partitioned open-plan office, it is important to determine how mood, satisfaction, and performance may be influenced by presenting visual information within partitions in order to create a more functional and satisfying environment. Individuals performing simple, boring, or monotonous tasks tend to prefer the open-plan office (Block & Stokes, 1989) and are less affected by the distractions (Hedge, 1982; Block & Stokes, 1989). The distractions of the open-plan office such as the decrease in auditory and personal privacy (Hedge, 1982; McCarrey et al., 1989) and increases in social

interaction (Crouch & Nimran, 1989) may actually serve as facilitators for some tasks. That is, the environmental demands may stimulate or assist individuals in performing their simple or monotonous tasks, by alleviating the monotony (Collins, 1975; Crouch & Nimran, 1989). On the other hand, tasks which are complex or require high attentional demands often necessitate a private area, where distractions are reduced (Hedge, 1982; Block & Stokes, 1989). In addition, individuals performing complex tasks tend to be more greatly affected by distractions (Block & Stokes, 1989). Therefore, as Crouch & Nimran (1989) suggested, environmental stimuli may interfere with certain task demands (Kaplan, 1983). Yet, individuals who work on high attentional demand tasks may need visual stimuli within the environment for restorative purposes (Kaplan, 1983). Restorative environments ought to allow an individual to rest in order to fend off further distractions (Kaplan, 1983). Environments which are restorative may also be supportive and allow opportunities for reflection or insight (Kaplan, 1983) and cue worker behavior (Rothman, 1987). An environmental stimulus identified as contributing stimulation to the environment is the window (Collins, 1975; Stone, 1993; Stone & Irvine, 1994). Although open-plan offices may have windows around the perimeter, partitions would tend to

176

N. J. Stone and A. J. English

decrease or eliminate potential interactions with the window. Therefore, it is not feasible to provide every worker with a view of a window. Nevertheless, Heerwagen & Orians (1986) found that academicians working in windowless offices tended to have more visual materials on their walls than individuals working in offices with windows. In addition, there were more landscaped than city-scaped pictures (Heerwagen & Orians, 1986). Landscaped pictures are more likely to be displayed in ones office because individuals tend to prefer scenic as opposed to city-scaped pictures (Markus, 1967; Kaplan et al., 1972; Stone, 1993) as well as more complex scenes (Kaplan et al., 1972). Individuals may prefer nature scenes because nature serves a restorative function (Kaplan, 1983). This may explain individuals strong desire for a window in order to have a view of the outside (Wells, 1965; Markus, 1967; Jackson & Holmes, 1973; Butler & Biner, 1989, 1990). Because individuals desire windows, but it is not feasible to provide everyone with a window, other means for providing stimulation or restorative functions are needed. For example, artificial windows, which provide motion picture loops of nature scenes, were nearly as desirable to office workers as outside windows (Young & Berry, 1979). Even inside windows, windows which give a view of another inside space, are generally desirable, especially if they allow for a view of a conventional window (Biner et al., 1991). Posters have also been found to provide stimulation similar to windows (Stone, 1993). Individuals performing creative or monotonous tasks reported using the posters to help with the task more than individuals working a computational task. Again, depending on the task, it appears as though some type and/or amount of stimulation added to the environment is necessary for individuals to perform their tasks. One way to increase environmental stimulation could include the use of posters or other visual stimuli; however, Biner et al. (1993) could not support the notion that windowlessness can be compensated by plants or pictures. More research is needed to determine the impact of visual stimuli on mood and performance. Besides pictures, color of the environment has also been found to influence mood and performance (Kwallek et al., 1988; Kwallek & Lewis, 1990). After completing a business typing task, mean stress and anxiety scores were higher for those who worked in the red office, whereas greater depression scores occurred for those who worked in the blue office (Kwallek et al., 1988). Although students perceived white offices to be more appropriate and less dis-

tracting than red or green offices, fewer errors on a clerical task occurred in the red office (Kwallek & Lewis, 1990). It may be that red is more stimulating and blue is more depressing or calming. That is, if the task is boring or monotonous, a red environment may contribute more stimulation, increasing performance. Similarly, Hamid and Newport (1989) found pre-school childrens strength to be affected by room color. The childrens strength was greater when the children were in a pink room. When the children moved to the grey room, their measured strength decreased if they had been in the pink room, but increased after being in the blue room. The childrens strength was also lower when they were in the blue room (Hamid & Newport, 1989). Additionally, the pre-schoolers were more likely to paint positive paintings in the pink room and negative paintings in the blue room. These findings support the notion that warm colors are stimulating whereas cool colors are sedative (Levy, 1984). Colors of longer wavelength (e.g. red) tend to be perceived as warm colors and shorter-wavelength colors (e.g. blue) tend to be perceived as cool (Whitfield & Wiltshire, 1990). Levy (1984) suggested that blueviolet colors elicit sadness and fatigue; anger and confusion are evoked by the color green; red is related to vigor, anger, and tension; and relaxation and self-effacement are produced by bluegreen colors (Levy, 1984). Based on the above-cited research, different colors in the environment may contribute different levels of stimulation to the environment. Yet, Green et al. (1983) found no support for the notion that blue colors are calming and red colors are stimulating. Additionally, Ainsworth et al . (1993) found red, bluegreen, and white offices to have no effect on the mood and performance of individuals performing clerical tasks. Elementary school childrens performance on standardized achievement tests also was not affected by classroom color (Wohlfarth, 1985). Similarly, Jacobs and Blandino (1992) and Herbst and Lester (1995) found the color of paper on which a mood test was given had little or no effect on mood. Only fatigue was significantly lower for individuals completing the Profile of Mood States questionnaire when the paper was red as opposed to green (Jacobs & Blandino, 1993). Mood ratings on all other colored papers fell in between the ratings for the red and green paper ratings. Given these contradictory findings, it is unclear what affect color will have on mood and performance, specifically in a working environment. If various colors introduce different levels of stimula-

Posters and Workspace Color

177
Window

tion to the environment, just as office design and posters do, then performance on a monotonous task ought to increase with stimulating colors. Performance on a high demand task, though, should decrease when performed in an environment with stimulating colors. Hence, as task demands increase, various levels of environmental stimulation ought to influence performance differently because, according to the YerkesDodson Law (1908), the individuals move from being under- to over-stimulated. It was hypothesized that a high attentional demand task, a red environment, and a scenic poster would each contribute stimulation to the environment. Therefore, individuals performing in a redcolored environment should have the highest levels of positive mood, satisfaction, and performance when working on the low attentional demand task, and even higher levels if there is a poster present. On the other hand, levels of positive mood, satisfaction, and performance were expected to be lower in the red condition when working on the high attentional demand task, especially when there was a poster present, because of too much stimulation. For the blue environment, it was hypothesized that the highest levels of positive mood, satisfaction, and performance would occur while working on the high attentional demand task with a poster present. The lowest levels of positive mood, satisfaction, and performance in the blue environment were expected for those working the low attentional demand task without a poster in the environment.

Work Stations

Work Stations

Experimenter's Desk

Individual Desks

Door FIGURE 1. Setup of partitioned work stations, the experimenters desk, and individual student desks.

Method Participants Undergraduate male (n=50) and female (n=62) students, aged 18 to 45 (median age=19) from a small, private mid-western university in the United States, participated in this study. The participants volunteered and received extra credit for their participation, which could be applied to one of their psychology courses. Students were randomly assigned to one of the eight conditions. Materials To create a partitioned work space, seven 1213 cm 2427 cm sheets of 25-cm thick extruded polystyrene insulation were used. Four of the sheets of insulation were used as the dividers (i.e. side boards) to the partitioned spaces. The remaining

three sheets were placed perpendicular to and between the four dividers to separate two facing desks. Therefore, the final design included six work stations, whereby there were two rows of three work stations which faced each other (see Figure 1). One row of the partitions was painted dark red (5R 5/8, Munsell Book of Color, 1929) and the other row was painted a light blue (10B 7/6, Munsell Book of Color, 1929). The end partitions, the partitions which faced the participants as they entered the room, were painted white. At the end of the work stations, closest to the door of entry, was the experimenters desk, upon which was placed the audio equipment controlled by the experimenter. The experimenters desk and chair faced the end partition (see Figure 1). Each partitioned work area was 1214 cm wide and 607 cm deep. Within each partition there was one desk (1062 cm 607 cm), a chair, a computer, and headphones. In five of the work stations, the computer was a MacIntosh Plus, but a McIntosh Classic was used in one work station. One of the MacIntosh Plus computers had an extended keyboard. Otherwise, all workstations were identical. The desks, chairs, and computers remained in their given position, but the partitions were randomly switched to ensure that the participants experience of the red or blue environment was counter-balanced with the side of the room and the computers.

178

N. J. Stone and A. J. English

Audio-tapes of a short, but repeated, conversation between two individuals role-playing the parts of a telemarketer and a customer were created as the data input. Each tape consisted of seven sessions. Each session contained 20 names and addresses of similar length and difficulty. The male telemarketer asked To whom should this order be mailed? The female customer responded with a given name. Then the telemarketer asked The address is? The street address, city, state, and zip code were then given by the customer. The city and state were the same for all addresses. The telemarketer ended by saying, Thank you for your order. This procedure was used for all 20 addresses in each session. The first three sessions were training sessions used to determine a baseline of performance for each individual. The low attentional demand tape consisted of seven identical sessions. In the high attentional demand tape, the first three sessions were identical to the sessions for the low attentional task. Sessions 4 through 7 included different names and addresses, which were similar with respect to length of name and address. All of the instructions as well as identical sessions were created by copying the original recording. Each session of the low demand audio tape was 5 min 47 s, with a total duration of 45 min 52 s. Sessions 4 through 7 on the high attentional demand audio-tape lasted 6 min 5 s; 6 min; 5 min 50 s; and 5 min 50 s, respectively. The high attentional demand tape lasted 45 min 40 s. In order to ensure that the students could not go back and change responses typed earlier, a special computer program was written. The participants were instructed to press on the mouse to begin a session. This initiated an internal timer which was set at 6 min 6 s for each session. The computer stored the data for each session, to be scored at a later time. The poster was a scene of a sunset behind mountains across a lake, which was rated as most pleasant in another study (Stone, 1993). The picture was enlarged to 203 cm 254 cm, placed in a plastic cover, and centered just above the computer when used. The Multiple Affect Adjective Check List (MAACL; Zuckerman & Lubin, 1985), state form, was used to assess mood. A six-item 5-point Likert-type questionnaire was developed to determine satisfaction with ones performance, the task (five items, alpha=085) and the cubicle (one item). Finally, a 5-point Likert-type questionnaire was created to determine students perception of the task (six items, alpha=075), perception of the task demands (three items, alpha=078), feelings of privacy (two items, alpha=064), feeling of isolation

(one item), ratings of room temperature (one item), ratings of room lighting levels (one item), amount of data input experience (one item), and tendency to look around the area during the task (one item). Procedure Groups of one to six students were admitted to a room 720 m 756 m. On the wall opposite the door, there was a window beginning 1067 cm from the floor, rising 190 cm and extending 245 cm across. The window was centered along the wall and covered with blinds. Because the door was not centered along the wall opposite the window, the partitions were centered in front of the door so the white partition faced the door and the participants could not see the color of the partitions while entering the room. Prior to entering the room, the students were ask to have a seat in one of the individual student desks. The individual desks were placed in a semicircle in front of, but to the sides of the partitioned work areas, facing toward the door (see Figure 1). Only after being seated could the students see the color of the partitions on the one side. After reading and signing the consent form, the participants were informed that they would be moving to one of the work stations where they would enter the data. The students were asked not to touch any of the computer equipment until they were told to do so, but that they should put on the headphones once seated. The rest of the instructions were presented on the audio tapes. When the students first sat at the work station, the message on the screen read Please wait until further instructions are given. All students received the same introduction and instructions. They were informed that they were to type in only the names and addresses given, not what the telemarketer asked, and that the names and addresses would be given in seven sessions. At the end of the instructions, the students were asked to raise their hands if they had any questions and the experimenter would assist them. After all questions were answered, the audio tape was continued. At this time, the students were instructed to press on the mouse at the start of the first session. When a session ended, the screen had the message This segment is complete. Please wait for further instructions. Then the students were told To start the next session, click on the mouse now. After the last session, the computer displayed Experiment Finished. Thank you for your participation. At this time, the participants were informed via the audio tape that the experimenter had several questionnaires for them to complete,

Posters and Workspace Color

179

that they were to remain seated, but that they could remove the headphones. While seated at their workstations, the MAACL was administered first. After the completed MAACL was collected, the satisfaction questionnaire was administered. The questionnaire which assessed perceptions of the task, feelings of privacy, and perceptions of the room was distributed last. When all students had completed this last questionnaire, they were asked to return to the individual desks, where they were debriefed, thanked for participating, and dismissed.

Results There were no differences in the number of years of data entry experience for any condition (range=05 years, median=0 years). Performance during Session 1 was not scored because several individuals had to be cued before they began entering the data and a few students asked questions after the first session began. Sessions 2 through 7 were scored by determining the number of errors in each session. An error included a missing letter, an incorrect letter, an omission of a space, or the improper order of letters. If letters of a word were out of order, then the fewest number of letters that could be moved to correct the spelling was the number of errors for that word. Because the students were unable to ask for the spelling of names or streets, some latitude was allowed, whereby words spelled correctly phonetically were not considered incorrect. After scoring the transcripts independently, if there was a scoring discrepancy, the experimenters worked together until they were in agreement as to the scoring of the data input. There was a significant improvement (reduction in errors) between the second and third sessions [ t (111)=410, p <0001]. Because there was no pre-selection of individuals on typing ability, number of errors during the third session was used as the covariate when an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was calculated. Performance was evaluated during Sessions 4 through 7. Performance during Session 3 was significantly correlated with performance during Session 4 [ r (110)=091, p <0001], Session 5 [ r (110)=087, p<0001], Session 6 [r(110)=086, p<0001)], and Session 7 [ r (100)=082, p <0001]. Therefore, an ANCOVA was performed to determine whether the two tasks did present different demands on the participants. A significant Time by Task interaction effect on performance was identified

[F(3,101)=1548, p<0001]. Over Sessions 4 through 7, those performing the low demand task improved ( M 4 A D J 1 =12567, S . D . 4 A D J =554; M 5 A D J =12457, S.D.5ADJ=684; M6ADJ=11293, S.D.6ADJ=721; M 7 A D J =10716, S . D . 7 A D J =785), whereas errors increased for those working the high demand task ( M 4 A D J =11694, S . D . 4 A D J =554; M 5 A D J =11998, S.D.5ADJ=684; M6ADJ=14195, S.D.6ADJ=721; M7ADJ=15085, S.D.7ADJ=785). The decrease in errors on the low demand task and the increase in errors on the high demand task led to a significant difference in performance in Sessions 6 and 7 due to the task [ F (1,103)=788, p <001; F (1,103)=1506, p<0001, respectively]. This tends to support the notion that the low demand task was easier than the high demand task. This notion is further supported by the observations that many students began typing the addresses in the latter sessions of the low demand task before the session of names and addresses on the tape began. To assess mood, the scores for the anxiety, depression, and hostility scales on the MAACL were converted to t-scores to account for number of items checked. These mood scales were not significantly correlated with errors in Session 3, so the covariate was not used in the analyses of variance (ANOVAs) for the mood scales. Only hostility was significantly affected by task type [F(1,104)=406, p<005]. Individuals performing the low demand task (M=8380, S.D.=3913) indicated higher levels of hostility than did those who performed the high demand task (M=706, S.D.=3022). Hostility was also marginally affected by the presence of the poster [ F (1,104)=332, p <010]. Hostility was somewhat lower when there was no poster (M=7127, S.D.=3629) than when there was a poster present (M=8318, S.D.=3382). The effect size (Kirk, 1982) was d=03. Levels of anxiety were only marginally affected by task type [F(1,104)=314, p<010]. Those performing the low demand task were slightly more anxious (M=6404, S.D.=1931) than those performing the high demand task (M=5841, S.D.=1341; d=03). Finally, depression was also only marginally affected by the presence of posters [F(1,104)=307, p<010] and the three-way interaction [F(1,104)=289, p<010]. Without a poster present, depression was slightly lower (M=6127, S.D.=2472) t h a n w h e n a p o s t e r w a s p r e s e n t (M = 6 9 7 1 , S.D.=2626). Again, the effect size was d=03. The three-way interaction indicates that regardless of task type and partition color, depression tended to be lower when no poster was present than when a poster was present, except during the high

180

N. J. Stone and A. J. English

demand task in the blue partitions, when the opposite effect occurred. The range of effect sizes between the cells in this interaction was 02 to 09. Also, the greatest difference in levels of depression occurred when individuals performed the high demand task in the red partitions. The lowest level of depression for those performing the high demand task in the red partitioned area occurred when no poster was present whereas the highest level of depression occurred when a poster was present (d=09). Equally high levels of depression also occurred for the low demand task in either colored partitioned area when posters were present (see Table 1). Satisfaction was assessed using the summed score of the five satisfaction items which measured how satisfied the individuals were with their performance and the task itself. The summed satisfaction score was negatively correlated (r(111)= 04, p<0001) with number of errors in Session 3. Yet, no significant effects due to task type, workspace color, or posters were found from the ANCOVA on satisfaction. Performance was measured by the number of errors that occurred during Sessions 4 through 7. Except for the Time Task effect on performance and the differences in performance due to task type during Sessions 6 and 7, performance was only affected by the Task Color interaction during Session 4 (F(1,103)=472, p<005). Errors were fairly constant for all conditions except during the low demand task in the red partitions. Specifically, errors for the low demand task in red partitions
TABLE 1

Means and standard deviations of the standardized depression scores for the task type color poster interaction effect Work space color Task type Low demand Poster not present M
S.D.

Blue

Red

6036 2908 7400 2690

6550 2936 7364 3586

Poster present M
S.D.

High demand Poster not present M

S.D.

6664 2234 5900 1723

5257 1569 7221 2111

Poster present M
S.D.

(MADJ=13886, S.D.ADJ=778) were much greater than in the blue condition (MADJ=11249, S.D.ADJ=777), or during the high demand task in either the blue (M A D J =12053, S . D . A D J =781) or red partitions (MADJ=11334, S.D.ADJ=775). Although performance increased or decreased over time, an ANOVA of the summed score task perception (measuring whether the tasks were monotonous, interesting, fun, fatiguing, or affecting individual comfort and/or motivation) did not indicate any effect due to task type. Task perception was only marginally affected by the presence of the poster (F(1,104)=277, p<010). When there was no poster, the task was perceived slightly less favorably (M=1364, S.D.=414) than when there was a poster (M=1500, S.D.=446). The effect size was d=03. Similarly, an ANCOVA of students ratings of task demand (the degree of concentration, challenge, and stress due to the tasks) also did not reveal an effect by task type. Task demand, though, was affected by the poster (F(1,103)=654, p<005) and the Task Poster interaction (F(1,103)=757, p<001). Overall, the lack of a poster led to a lower rating of task demand (MADJ=1087, S.D.ADJ=031) than the presence of a poster (MADJ=1199, S.D.ADJ=031). Yet, the interaction suggests that this effect occurred mainly when the high demand task was performed. Task demand was rated similarly for the low demand task without a poster (M A D J =1117, S.D.ADJ=044) and with a poster present (MADJ=1109, S.D.ADJ=044). Yet, when working the high demand task, task demand was rated lowest when there was no poster (M ADJ =1056, S . D . ADJ =044) and highest when a poster was present (MADJ=1289, S.D.ADJ=044). Additionally, the Task Color interaction marginally affected task demand ratings (F(1,103)=369, p<010). Again, the greatest effect occurred in the high demand task condition. Those who worked the low demand task rated task demand lower when in the blue partitioned area (MADJ=1087, S.D.ADJ=044) than in the red partitioned area (M A D J =1139, S.D.ADJ=044). In contrast, when working the high demand task, task demand was rated highest for the blue partitioned area (MADJ=1231, S.D.ADJ=044) and lower in the red partitioned area (M ADJ =1115, S.D.ADJ=044). Although this effect was marginal, the effect sizes among the groups were medium (d=05) to large (d=33). Interestingly, perceived task demand was significantly correlated with several dependent variables (see Table 2). Other ANOVAs were computed to determine whether ratings of the pleasantness of the cubicles, temperature, lighting levels, feelings of isolation,

Posters and Workspace Color

TABLE 2

181

Correlations between perceived task demand and various dependent variables over all conditions and for the low and high demand tasks Task demand correlated with: Anxiety Depression Hostility Privacy Satisfaction Cubicle pleasant? Looked about? Note: *p<005, **p<001, ***p<0001. Overall (n=112) 034*** 009 019* 006 -030** 008 033*** Low demand task (n=56) 039** -003 003 003 -031* 002 037** High demand task (n=56) 033* 031* 044*** 008 -031* 015 030*

and degree of privacy were affected by the manipulations. There was a significant Task Poster interaction on ratings of how pleasant the cubicle was (F(1,104)=456, p<005). During the low demand task, the cubicles were rated moderately pleasant without (M=254, S . D .=110) or with a poster (M=243, S.D.=110). For the high demand task, the cubicle was rated least pleasant when there was no poster (M=196, S.D.=107) and rated most pleasant with a poster (M=271, S.D.=090). Consistent with the notion that some colors are warm and others are cool, perceived room temperature was affected by Color (F(1,104)=454, p<005) and marginally affected by Poster (F(1,104)=416, p<010). Individuals performing in the blue partitions perceived the temperature to be cooler (M=304, S.D.=057) than those in the red partitioned workspaces (M=325, S.D.=048). Temperature was also rated slightly warmer when there was no poster (M=323, S.D.=054) than when there was a poster (M=305, S.D.=052). The effect size was d=03. Students also reported (yes or no) whether they looked at things other than the screen and/or keyboard during the task. Because the responses were dichotomous, logistic regression was calculated to determine differences in response rates for the various conditions. The covariate measure was also used. Color of the environment marginally affected response rates while the Task Poster interaction and the three-way interaction significantly affected response rates (see Table 3). Marginally more students were likely to report looking about the environment when in the red as opposed to the blue environment. The greatest number of students who reported looking about occurred when students worked the high demand task without a poster, especially if students worked within the red environment. When students worked the high demand task with a poster, the fewest number of students

reported looking about the environment, especially when working in the red environment (see Table 4). Finally, ratings of the amount of lighting and feelings of isolation were not affected by any of the manipulations. Yet, ones perceived amount of privacy was affected by color (F(1,104)=517, p<005). Privacy was perceived to be higher in the blue partitions (M=832, S.D.=124) than in the red partitioned spaces (M=770, S.D.=166).
TABLE 3

Maximum-likelihood analysis of variance table for the logistic regression for looking about the environment Source Intercept Performance time 3 Task (A) Color (B) A B Posters (C) A C B C A B C Likelihood ratio Note: *p<010, **p<005.
TABLE 4

df. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100

182 474** 004 344* 051 103 478** 242 373** 12947

Frequencies of students who responded Yes to looking about the environment for the three-way interaction Workspace color Task type Low demand Poster not present Poster present High demand Poster not present Poster present Note: n=14 per cell. Blue 5 6 5 5 Red 6 8 12 4

182

N. J. Stone and A. J. English

Discussion Task type, presence of a scenic poster, and workspace color were manipulated to determine the effects on individuals mood, satisfaction, and performance. Only hostility was affected by task type, whereby individuals who performed the low demand task were more hostile than individuals who performed the high demand task. Besides hostility, mood was only negligibly affected by the task, environmental color, and poster presence. These negligible effects may be due to the similarity of the tasks. Even though there were performance differences over time and students who performed the low demand task had higher hostility and slightly higher anxiety levels, suggesting different task demands, the students perceived the tasks to be quite similar (e.g. monotonous, unmotivating, not fun). Again, students performing the low demand task often started typing the responses before the tape began. These data suggest that the low demand task was the least taxing, but the most monotonous and boring of the two tasks. Because of the perceived similarities of the tasks, it is not surprising that there were no differences in satisfaction with the task or performance because of poster presence or environmental color, as expected. It is likely that the performance differences over time and during Session 4 were not strong enough due to the task similarities to affect satisfaction levels. Yet, the correlation between performance and satisfaction suggests that satisfaction with the task or performance may be influenced only by actual performance and not the characteristics of the environment. Performance also was not affected by the task, environmental color, or poster presence, as expected. The only performance difference occurred during Session 4, due to the task and workspace color interaction effect. Students performing the low demand task in the red partitioned area should have had the least, not the most errors. This effect may be explained by perceived task demand and hostility levels. When the low demand task was performed in the blue condition, it marginally led to the lowest ratings of task demand. Yet the low demand task created the greatest levels of hostility. Therefore, the low perceived task demand affected by the blue environment may have countered the high level of hostility generated by the low demand task, leading to the fewest number of errors. When the low and high demand tasks were performed in the red condition, a moderate level of task demand was perceived. This moderate level of task

demand, in combination with the high level of hostility due to the low demand task, may have caused the extreme number of errors. In contrast, the lower hostility level of the high demand task apparently interacted with the moderate level of perceived task demand due to the red condition, leading to fewer errors. That is, this high demand task was a monotonous task, whereby the performers appear to have benefited from the stimulation from the color red. This corroborates the notion that individuals working monotonous tasks prefer distractions or more stimulation in their environments (Hedge, 1982; Block & Stokes, 1989). This may also explain Kwallek and Lewiss (1990) finding that fewer errors occurred in the red office assuming their clerical task is similar to this high demand task. Finally, perceived task demand was highest for the high demand task in the blue condition, but errors were reduced apparently due to the lower level of hostility generated from the high demand task. Again, perceived task demand appears to interact with environmental factors. Other analyses revealed that ratings of cubicle pleasantness were affected by poster presence, with the greatest effects occurring when the high demand task was performed. Moderate ratings of cubicle pleasantness occured when the low demand task was performed. Individuals who performed the high demand task rated the cubicle least pleasant when there was no poster and most pleasant when there was a poster. Similarly, when the high demand task was performed without a poster, this created lower ratings of task demand than when the high demand task was performed with a poster present. Therefore, it appears that perceived task demand corresponds to ratings of cubicle pleasantness. When perceived task demand was low, the pleasantness of the cubicle was also low. When task demand was perceived to be high, the cubicle was also rated as most pleasant. This finding that the presence of a poster corresponded to high perceived task demand as well as higher ratings of cubicle pleasantness suggests that perceived task demand is influenced by some comparison process. That is, the high demand task may have been perceived to have greater task demand in comparison to the calming or pleasant aspects of the scenic poster. When the poster was not present, then no comparison was possible, effecting a lower perceived task demand for the high demand task. Perceived task demand was similar for the low demand task regardless of the presence of the poster. The notion that a comparison process is occurring is further supported by the marginal, but

Posters and Workspace Color

183

similar, findings that hostility and depression levels were slightly higher when a poster was present. Various levels of perceived task demand appear to influence other perceptions, especially for individuals who performed the high demand task. Higher levels of perceived task demand were associated with higher levels of hostility, anxiety, and depression, and lower levels of satisfaction. Understanding when perceptions of task demand were high or low helps explain other findings. Even though the low demand task generated moderate ratings of task demand with or without a poster, the marginal three-way interaction on depression indicates that depression was lower for the low demand tasks when there was no poster than when a poster was present, regardless of workspace color. In contrast, when the high demand task was performed without a poster, significantly lower ratings of task demand occurred, yet higher levels of depression resulted for individuals in the blue condition than those in the red partitions. Because of the perceived low task demand, it may be that the depressing or calming effects of the blue environment contributed to the depression, but the red condition added stimulation to the environment, which lessened depression. On the other hand, when the high demand task was performed with a poster, this led to the highest rated levels of task demand. When performed in the blue condition, depression was lower than when performed in the red condition. This further supports the notion that the blue environment was depressing in the sense of calming the individuals who had the high perceived task demand created by working the high demand task with a poster present. In the red condition, though, it appears as though the addition of the red color to an already high demand situation led to higher depression scores, as predicted. Therefore, mood appears to be indirectly affected by posters and workspace color via perceptions of task demand. Similar arguments could be made for the effects of workspace color, although these findings are marginal. When working in a blue-colored partitioned area, the high demand task may appear to have greater task demand in comparison to the calming or depressing aspects of the blue color. Similarly, the low demand task would be perceived as having less actual task demand in comparison to the blue environment. Furthermore, because students perceived the blue partitioned areas to be more private, they may have focused more on the task. In contrast, while working in the red condition, the stimulation from the color may make the high demand task seem less taxing and the low demand task more tax-

ing. Therefore, it appears as though the blue environment allows individuals to focus more on the task, leading to more extreme ratings of task demand. The red condition, though, tends to draw ones attention away from the task, whereby the ratings of task demand are moderated. This may explain why students perceived the red partitioned areas to be less private. Finally, students indicated whether they looked at anything other than the keyboard and/or screen during the task. Students tended to report that they looked about the environment more often when in conditions which created lower levels of perceived task demand and reported looking about less often when perceived task demand was higher. Recall that the low demand task performed without or with a poster led to a moderate level of rated task demand. Yet, the high demand task was rated as having the lowest perceived task demand when performed without a poster present, and the highest level of task demand when performed with a poster present. Thus, for the low demand task (moderate level of perceived task demand), individuals were equally likely to look or not look at things other than the screen and/or keyboard. Yet, individuals were more likely to look at other things when the high demand task was performed without a poster (i.e. low perceived task demand) and they were less likely to look about when a poster was present (i.e. high perceived task demand). The notion that individuals look about their environments more when the immediate environment is less stimulating is further supported by the three-way interaction. The blue-partitioned area tended to produce low perceived task demand for individuals performing the low demand task, but high perceived task demand for those performing the high demand task. Additionally, regardless of poster presence, the low demand task generated a moderate level of task demand. Therefore, individuals were equally likely to look about the workspace while performing the low demand task in the blue cubicles without or with a poster. When the high demand task was performed with no poster, there was low perceived task demand, but when the high demand task was performed in the blue condition, ratings of perceived task demand were high. When the high demand task was performed in the blue workspace with no poster present, individuals tended not to look about as much. In fact, they tended to look about as little as those working the high demand task in the blue condition with a poster (i.e. the highest demand situation). That is, when

184

N. J. Stone and A. J. English

task demand was high, fewer students reported that they looked about the environment. For individuals working in the red partitions, perceived task demand was moderate and the same for both the high and low demand tasks. Because the low demand tasks performed without or with a poster produced moderate levels of task demand, once again individuals were somewhat more likely to report looking about when a poster was present. While performing the high demand task, though, individuals performing without a poster (i.e. the lowest perceived task demand) were much more likely to look about than those who performed the high demand task with a poster. Again, those individuals who experienced more task demand tended to report looking about much less than those who experienced low levels of task demand. These findings support the idea that the color red may in fact be stimulating, whereas the color blue is calming an d /or d ep ressing, creating a more private environment. Additionally, the blue workspace was perceived to be cooler than the red partitioned cubicles. This finding corroborates the findings of Whitfield and Wiltshire (1990). The fact that there were no differences in perceived lighting is good. If color does affect mood, satisfaction level, and/or performance, then color could be manipulated without being concerned about perceived lighting levels. When interpreting these results, recall that some of the results were marginal. Yet, the marginal results tended to be in the same direction, led to the same or similar conclusions, and resulted in several medium to large effect sizes. That is, the impact of the effects were substantial, but the sample size was too small to produce significant F ratios (Kirk, 1982). Also, although the tasks used in this study did require different demands of the participants, it appears as though the low demand task may have been too monotonous, which overshadowed some of the other manipulations. On the other hand, the high demand task was also monotonous, but not too aggravating, which may explain why the greatest influences occurred when the high demand task was performed. In addition, the participants were not paid nor trained workers, but rather volunteers. This may have affected motivation, but it may not have had a great effect on the results as Butler and Steuerwald (1991) found no differences between workers and students who made evaluations of environmental models. Finally, even though the students entered data for about 40 min, this is a short duration relative to the work day and work week. It is possible that there could be greater

effects of these manipulations after greater exposure to different workspace colors and to scenic posters. In conclusion, it is apparent that environmental color and the presence or absence of a scenic poster interact with the perceptions of task demand, differentially affecting perceptions and mood. The specific effects of these variables, though, are unclear and more research is needed, especially the moderating effects of perceived task demand. Also, because the tasks used in this study were similar, the effects of environmental color and posters on different tasks need to be investigated. Finally, if it is possible to affect mood over longer time periods, then it is probable that performance and, hence, satisfaction could also be affected. Acknowledgements We greatly appreciate Aaron Lupos work in creating the computer program used for this project. We also with to thanks Steve Wood and Krystal Kremla for their help in creating the audio tapes. This paper was presented at the 37th Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association, October, 1995, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Note
Reprint requests and correspondence should be addressed to Nancy J. Stone, Department of Psychology, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, 68178. Electronic mail may be sent to nstone@creighton.edu. (1) Adjusted means and standard deviations are reported with the ANCOVA results and are denoted with the subscript, ADJ.

References
Ainsworth, R. A., Simpson, L. & Cassell, D. (1993). Effects of three colors in an office interior on mood and performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 235241. Biner, P. M., Butler, D. L. & Winstead, D. E. III (1991). Inside windows: an alternative to conventional windows in offices and other settings. Environment and Behavior, 23, 359382. Biner, P. M., Butler, D. L., Lovegrove, T. A. & Burns, R. L. (1993). Windowlessness at the workplace: a reexamination of the compensation hypothesis. Environment and Behavior, 25, 205227. Block, L. K. & Stokes, G. S. (1989). Performance and satisfaction in private versus nonprivate work settings. Environment and Behavior, 21, 277297. Brooks, M. J. & Kaplan, A. (1972). The office environment: space planning and affective behavior. Human Factors, 14(5), 373391.

Posters and Workspace Color Butler, D. L. & Biner, P. M. (1989). Effects of setting on window preferences and factors associated with those preferences. Environment and Behavior, 21, 1731. Butler, D. L. & Biner, P. M. (1990). A preliminary study of skylight preferences. Environment and Behavior, 22, 119140. Butler, D. L. & Steuerwald, B. L. (1991). Effects of view and room size on window size preferences made in models. Environment and Behavior, 23, 334358. Collins, B. L. (1975). Windows and People: a literature survey. Psychological reaction to environments with and without windows. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards. Crouch, A. & Nimran, U. (1989). Perceived facilitators and inhibitors of work performance in an office environment. Environment and Behavior, 21, 206226. Green, T. C., Bell, P. A. & Boyer, W. N. (1983). Coloring the environment: Hue, arousal, and boredom. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 21, 253254. Hamid, P. N. & Newport, A. G. (1989). Effect of colour on physical strength and mood in children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 179185. Hedge, A. (1982). The open-plan office. Environment and Behavior, 14, 519542. Heerwagen, J. H. & Orians, G. H. (1986). Adaptations to windowlessness: A study of the use of visual decor in windowed and windowless offices. Environment and Behavior, 18, 623639. Herbst, A. & Lester, D. (1995). Blue questionnaires and blue mood. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 81, 514. Jackson, G. J. & Holmes, J. G. (1973). Lets keep it simple: What we want from daylight. Light and Lighting and Environmental Design, 66(3), 8082. Jacobs, K. W. & Blandino, S. E. (1992). Effects of color of paper on which the Profile of Mood States is printed on the psychological states it measures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 267271. Kaplan, S. (1983). A model of personenvironment compatibility. Environment and Behavior, 15, 311332. Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R. & Wendt, J., S. (1972). Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual materials. Perception and Psychophysics, 12, 254. Kirk, R. E. (1982). Experimental Design: procedures for the behavioral sciences (2nd Edn). Belmont, CA: Brooks/ Cole. Kwallek, N. & Lewis, C. M. (1990). Effects of environmental colour on males and females: A red or white or green office. Applied Ergonomics, 21, 275278. Kwallek, N., Lewis, C. M. & Robbins, A. S. (1988). Effects of office interior color on workers mood and productivity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 123128. Levy, B. I. (1984). Research into the psychological

185

meaning of color. American Journal of Art Therapy, 23, 5862. Markus, T. A. (1967). The function of windows: a reappraisal. Building Science, 2, 97121. McCarrey, M. W., Peterson, L., Edwards, S. & Von Kulmiz, P. (1974). Landscape office attitudes: Reflections of perceived degree of control over transactions with the environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 401403. Munsell Book of Color: Defining, Explaining, and Illustrating the Fundamental Characteristics of Color (1929). Baltimore, MD: Munsell Color Company. Oldham, G. R. & Brass, D. J. (1979). Employee reactions to an open-plan office: a naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 267284. Rothman, M. (1987). Designing work environments to influence productivity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1, 390395. Stone, N. J. (1993, October). Windows, environmental cues, performance, and mood. Poster session presented at the 37th annual meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Seattle, WA. Stone, N. J. & Irvine, J. M. (1993). Performance, mood, satisfaction, and task type in various work environments. Journal of General Psychology, 120, 489497. Stone, N. J. & Irvine, J. M. (1994). Direct or indirect window access, task type, and performance. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 5763. Wells, B. W. P. (1965). Subjective responses to the lighting installation in a modern office building and their design implications. Building and Environment, 1, 5768. Whitfield, T. W. A. & Wiltshire, T. J. (1990). Color psychology: a critical review. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 116, 387411. Wohlfarth, D. (1985). The lack of effect of color psychodynamic environmental modification on academic achievement and I.Q. scores in elementary grade students. International Journal for Biosocial Research, 7, 4954. Yerkes, R. M. & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurological Psychology, 18, 459482. Young, I. H. & Berry, G. L. (1979). The impact of environment on the productivity attitudes of intellectually challenged office workers. Human Factors, 21, 399 407. Zuckerman, M. & Lubin, B. (1985). The Multiple Affect Adjective Check ListRevised. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.