| Literature DB >> 35682449 |
Yuan Fang1, Chang Liu2, Chengcheng Zhao2, Hongyu Zhang2, Weizhen Wang3, Nianyu Zou2.
Abstract
The indoor lighting environment is a key factor affecting human health and safety. In particular, people have been forced to study or work more for long periods of time at home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we investigate the influence of physical indoor environmental factors, correlated color temperature (CCT), and illumination on computer work fatigue. We conducted a within-subject experiment consisting of a 10 min-long task test under two different illumination settings (300 lx and 500 lx) and two CCTs (3000 K and 4000 K). Physiological signals, such as electroencephalogram (EEG), electrocardiograph (ECG), and eye movement, were monitored during the test to objectively measure fatigue. The subjective fatigue of eight participants was evaluated based on a questionnaire conducted after completing the test. The error rate of the task test was taken as the key factor representing the working performance. Through the analysis of the subjective and objective results, computer work fatigue was found to be significantly impacted by changes in the lighting environment, where human fatigue was negatively correlated with illumination and CCT. Improving the illumination and CCT of the work environment, within the scope of this study, helped to decrease the fatigue degree-that is, the fatigue degree was the lowest under the 4000 K + 500 lx environment, while it was relatively high at 3000 K + 300 lx. Under indoor environment conditions, the CCT factor was found to have the greatest effect on computer work fatigue, followed by illumination. The presented results are expected to be a valuable reference for improving the satisfaction associated with the lighting environment and to serve as guidance for researchers and reviewers conducting similar research.Entities:
Keywords: ECG; EEG; HRV; fatigue; indoor lighting environment
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35682449 PMCID: PMC9180354 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116866
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Detailed view of full-scale mock-up model space.
Parameters of experimental equipment.
| Equipment | Brand | Parameter |
|---|---|---|
| LED Tube | Philips T5 | 11 w 1, CRI 2 = 80, |
| SDCM 3 < 6, 1100 LM 4 | ||
| Display Terminal | DELLS2721Q | 27 Inch 5, 350 cd/m |
1 w: A unit of power, defined as 1 joule/second (1 J/s). 2 CRI: Color Rendering Index. 3 SDCM: Standard Deviation of Color Matching. 4 LM: Unit of luminous flux. 5 Inch: A unit of length, 1 inch is equal to 2.54 cm. 6 cd/m2: Unit brightness of the light source. 7 99% sRGB: Color Gamut.
Physical parameters of experimental environment.
| State | CCT | Illumination | Temperature | Humidity | PMV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3-I3 | 3000 K | 300 lx | |||
| C3-I5 | 3000 K | 500 lx | 21–24 | 45–65% | |
| C4-I3 | 4000 K | 300 lx | |||
| C4-I5 | 4000 K | 500 lx |
Participant information.
| Participant | Gender | Age | Vision |
|---|---|---|---|
| P 1 | Male | 21 | Myopia |
| P 2 | Male | 19 | Myopia |
| P 3 | Female | 20 | Myopia |
| P 4 | Female | 21 | Myopia |
| P 5 | Female | 18 | No Myopia |
| P 6 | Male | 20 | Myopia |
| P 7 | Male | 18 | Myopia |
| P 8 | Female | 19 | Myopia |
Physiological signal acquisition equipment parameters.
| Equipment | Brand | Parameter |
|---|---|---|
| EEG Cap | Ergo LAB | Sample rate, 32 kHZ |
| Resolution, 24 Bit | ||
| ECG Module | Ergo LAB | Sample rate, 250 HZ |
| Eye Tracker | Tobii Glasses2 | Sample rate, 50 HZ |
Figure 2Premise of letter discrimination test.
Figure 3Contents of E-word memory test.
Figure 4Fatigue evaluation scale.
Figure 5Experimental flowchart.
Figure 6Subjective fatigue under different lighting environments.
EEG frequency classification.
| Rhythm | Frequency (Hz) | Amplitude ( | Dominant Period |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1–4 | 20–200 | Deep sleep |
|
| 4–8 | 20–150 | Drowsy/Frustration |
|
| 8–14 | 20–100 | Quietness |
|
| 14–30 | 5–20 | Excitatory state |
|
| >30 | — | Cognitive task |
Figure 7EEG topographical representation.
Figure 8Proportions of different EEG frequency bands.
EEG rhythm energy ratio.
| Working Condition | Ratio | P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | P7 | P8 | Mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3-I3 | 15.2 | 16.9 | 11.6 | 14.4 | 7.4 | 10.9 | 11.4 | 5.4 | 11.65 | |
| ( | 15.6 | 17.2 | 11.9 | 14.8 | 8.2 | 11.5 | 12.0 | 6.1 | 12.18 | |
| 3000 K + 300 lx | ( | 9.4 | 10.1 | 8.4 | 9.4 | 4.9 | 6.9 | 7.0 | 4.0 | 7.53 |
| 9.0 | 9.8 | 7.9 | 9.0 | 4.1 | 6.3 | 6.4 | 3.4 | 7.00 | ||
| C3-I5 | 11.3 | 17.8 | 11.6 | 13.0 | 6.3 | 12.1 | 8.8 | 5.4 | 10.79 | |
| ( | 12.0 | 18.2 | 11.5 | 13.4 | 7.3 | 12.6 | 9.5 | 6.1 | 11.40 | |
| 3000 K + 500 lx | ( | 6.6 | 9.6 | 8.4 | 8.7 | 3,9 | 7.8 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 6.90 |
| 5.9 | 9.2 | 8.0 | 8.3 | 2.9 | 7.3 | 5.4 | 3.3 | 6.30 | ||
| 15.5 | 19.4 | 11.2 | 12.5 | 8.8 | 12.0 | 6.6 | 5.3 | 11.41 | ||
| ( | 15.9 | 19.7 | 11.6 | 12.9 | 9.5 | 12.6 | 7.3 | 5.9 | 11.94 | |
| 4000 K + 300 lx | ( | 9.1 | 10.9 | 8.2 | 8.1 | 6 | 7.9 | 4.7 | 3.9 | 7.36 |
| 8.7 | 10.6 | 7.8 | 7.6 | 5.4 | 7.4 | 3.9 | 3.3 | 6.83 | ||
| C4-I5 | 15.5 | 17.3 | 11.8 | 13.2 | 4.6 | 12.2 | 10.0 | 5.3 | 11.24 | |
| ( | 15.9 | 17.7 | 12.2 | 13.6 | 5.9 | 12.7 | 11.0 | 5.9 | 11.89 | |
| 4000 K + 500 lx | ( | 9.1 | 10.4 | 8.4 | 8.8 | 2.8 | 7.9 | 5.4 | 3.9 | 7.10 |
| 8.7 | 10.0 | 7.9 | 8.4 | 1.4 | 7.4 | 4.4 | 3.3 | 6.45 |
HRV time-domain indicators.
| Working Condition | Time-Domain Index | Unit | P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | P7 | P8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3-I3 | MeanIBI | ms | 770 | 796 | 863 | 989 | 799 | 718 | 729 | 873 |
| MeanHR | bpm | 78 | 75 | 70 | 61 | 75 | 84 | 82 | 69 | |
| 3000 K + 300 lx | SDNN | ms | 206 | 171 | 64 | 97 | 50 | 78 | 331 | 45 |
| RMSSD | ms | 217 | 183 | 80 | 123 | 48.7 | 56.3 | 369 | 39 | |
| C3-I5 | MeanIBI | ms | 743 | 848 | 863 | 1004 | 785 | 781 | 679 | 873 |
| MeanHR | bpm | 81 | 71 | 70 | 60 | 76 | 77 | 88 | 69 | |
| 3000 K + 500 lx | SDNN | ms | 143 | 158 | 63 | 88 | 46 | 59 | 187 | 45 |
| RMSSD | ms | 145 | 226 | 80.3 | 111 | 40 | 51 | 229 | 39 | |
| C4-I3 | MeanIBI | ms | 772 | 833 | 824 | 926 | 744 | 818 | 801 | 820 |
| MeanHR | bpm | 78 | 72 | 73 | 65 | 81 | 73 | 75 | 73 | |
| 4000 K + 300 lx | SDNN | ms | 167 | 89 | 164 | 90 | 72 | 66 | 317 | 46 |
| RMSSD | ms | 150 | 110 | 173 | 96 | 96 | 69 | 373 | 42 | |
| C4-I5 | MeanIBI | ms | 719 | 835 | 852 | 1005 | 781 | 869 | 742 | 820 |
| MeanHR | bpm | 83 | 72 | 70 | 60 | 77 | 69 | 81 | 73 | |
| 4000 K + 500 lx | SDNN | ms | 107 | 65 | 119 | 155 | 70 | 171 | 276 | 46 |
| RMSSD | ms | 111 | 72 | 114 | 136 | 84 | 193 | 268 | 42 |
Figure 9Trend of HRV time-domain indicators.
Frequency-domain index classification.
| Frequency Band | Range (Hz) |
|---|---|
| ULF | 0–0.0033 |
| VLF | 0.0033–0.04 |
| LF | 0.04–0.15 |
| HF | 0.15–0.4 |
Ratio of low frequency to high frequency.
| CCT | Illumination | LF/HF |
|---|---|---|
| 3000 K | 300 lx |
|
| 500 lx |
| |
| 4000 K | 300 lx |
|
| 500 lx |
|
Figure 10Pupil diameter in different lighting environments.
Figure 11Fixation point trajectory diagram for test 1 under different lighting environments.
Figure 12Fixation Point Trajectory Diagram for test 2 under different lighting environments.
Figure 13Error rate and fatigue degree trend under different lighting environments.