Scale: Job Performance (Pilot Test)

(1)

The copyright © of this thesis belongs to its rightful author and/or other copyright owner. Copies can be accessed and downloaded for non-commercial or learning purposes without any charge and permission. The thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted as a whole without the permission from its rightful owner. No alteration or changes in format is allowed without permission from its rightful owner.

(2)

ii

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORKPLACE DESIGN FEATURES AND JOB PERFORMANCE

ELHAMI @ CHE KASSIM BIN KAMARUDIN

Master of Human Resource Management Universiti Utara Malaysia

(3)

iii

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORKPLACE DESIGN FEATURES AND JOB PERFORMANCE

BY

ELHAMI @ CHE KASSIM BIN KAMARUDIN

Thesis Submitted to School of Business Management,

Universiti Utara Malaysia

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Master of Human Resource Management

(4)

(5)

i

PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirement for a post graduate degree from the Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM), I agree that the library of this university may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying this dissertation in any manner, in whole or in part for scholarly purposes may be granted by my supervisor or in their absence, by the Dean of school of business Management where I did my dissertation. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this dissertation parts of it for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to UUM in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my dissertation.

Request for permission to copy or to make other use of material in this dissertation in whole or in part should be addressed to:

Dean of School of Business Management Universiti Utara Malaysia

06010 UUM Sintok Kedah Darul Aman

(6)

ii

ABSTRACT

This research seeks to examine the relationship between workplace design features and job performance.Based on a comprehensive literature review, a theoretical model is proposed for investigation. This research is performed through quantitative, and a total of 200 questionnaires are circulated through a google form. The data are collected from one of government agency buildings utilized online data collection. The researcher used a convenience sampling approach and a structured questionnaire. A self-administrated structured questionnaire is used to collect data. The result showed that there is positive the relationship between lighting, acoustic and relative humidity. The study confirmed that workplace design is significantly correlated with job performance. The findings of the study indicate that there is a strong positive relationship between workplace design features and job performance.

Keywords: Workplace Design Features, Job performance, Lighting, Acoustic and Relative humidity

(7)

iii

ABSTRAK

Penyelidikan ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji hubungan antara ciri-ciri reka bentuk tempat kerja dan prestasi kerja. Berdasarkan tinjauan literatur yang komprehensif, model teori telah diusulkan untuk penyelidikan. Penyelidikan ini dilakukan melalui kuantitatif dan sejumlah 200 soal selidik diedarkan melalui Google form. Data dikumpulkan dari salah satu bangunan agensi kerajaan yang menggunakan pengumpulan data dalam talian. Pendekatan persampelan kemudahan dan soal selidik berstruktur digunakan oleh penyelidik. Soal selidik berstruktur yang dikendalikan sendiri digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahawa terdapat hubungan positif antara pencahayaan, akustik dan kelembapan relative. Kajian mengesahkan bahawa reka bentuk tempat kerja berkorelasi secara signifikan dengan prestasi pekerja. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahawa terdapat hubungan positif antara ciri reka bentuk tempat kerja dengan prestasi kerja.

Kata kunci: Reka bentuk tempat kerja, Prestasi kerja, Pencahayaan, Akustik dan Kelembapan relatif.

(8)

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

All praised and gratitude are given to Almighty Allah for his blessing and guidance from the beginning of my life to this very moment, and for the completion of my programed and also for the enormous strength, patience, courage and ability showered upon me. I would like to present my humble appreciation and gratitude to all the people who made this journey possible. I am in debated to those who knowingly and unknowingly were so helpful and showed their importance during those difficult moments.

I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr Zuraida Binti Hassan. This thesis would not be possible without her endless effort, dedication, courage and support. My heartfelt, special and appreciation thanks and love goes to both my parents Hj Kamarudin Bin Che Kassim And My lovely dear mom Hajah Che Gayah Binti Akob and both of my sisters Khazura Binti Kamarudin and Anida Binti Kamarudin for their constant demonstration of love and continuous moral support throughout the duration of my study.

Finally, I am grateful to my classmate and my best friends Mr. Saiful Islam Bin Ghazali and Mr. Mohd Khaidir Bin Mohd Salleh who only could be described as a great one.

(9)

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PERMISSION TO USE i

ABSTRACT ii

ABSTRAK iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

LIST OF TABLES ix

LIST OF FIGURES ix

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1

1.0 Introduction 1

1.1 Background of study 1

1.2 Problem statement 3

1.3 Research Question 5

1.4 Research Objective 5

1.5 Significant Of Study 6

1.6 Scope of Study 7

1.7 Definition Of key term 7

1.7.1 Relative Humidity 8

1.7.2 Acoustic Quality 8

1.7.3 Lighting 8

1.7.4 Job Performance 8

1.8 Organization of Thesis 9

1.9 Summary 10

(10)

vi

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 11

2.1 Introduction 11

2.2 Variable of study 11

2.2.1.1 Previous study on job performance 12

2.2.2 Lighting 13

2.2.2.1 Relationship betweenlighting and job performance 13

2.2.3 Relative humidity 14

2.2.3.1 Relationship between relative humidity and job performance 14

2.2.4 Acoustic 15

2.2.4.1 Relationship between acoustic and job performance 15

2.3 Hypothesis development 16

2.4 Factor that influences job performance 16

2.5 Research framework 16

2.6 Underpinning Theory 17

2.7 Conclusion 18

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 19

3.1 Research Design 19

3.2 Population, Sample, and Sampling Technique 20

3.2.1 Population 20

3.2.2 Sample of Size 20

3.2.3 Sampling Technique 21

3.2.4 Unit of Analysis 21

3.3 Operational Definition 21

3.4 Measurement of Variable 22

3.4.1 Relative Humidity 22

3.4.2 Acoustic 23

(11)

vii

3.4.3 Lighting 23

3.5 Data collection Procedure 24

3.6 Data Analysis Procedure 25

3.7 Pilot Test 26

3.8 Conclusion 27

CHAPTER 4: RESULT OF FINDINGS 28

4.1 Introduction 28

4.2 Response Rate 28

4.3 Data Screening 29

4.4 Reliability Test of Actual Data 29

4.5 Demographic Characteristic 30

4.6 Mean and Standard Deviation 31

4.7 Correlations Analysis 31

4.8 Determination of Relationship between Variables 32

4.9 Summary of Hypothesis Testing Analysis 34

4.10 Chapter Summary 35

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 36

5.1 Introduction 36

5.2 Summary of Findings 36

5.3 Discussion of Result 39

5.3.1 The relationship of relative humidity on job performance 39 5.3.2 The relationship of acoustic on job performance 39 5.3.3 The relationship of lighting on job performance 40

5.4 Implication of Study 41

(12)

viii

5.4.1 Practical Implication 41

5.4.2 Theoretical Implication 41

5.5 Limitation of Study 42

5.6 Suggestion for Future Research 43

5.7 Conclusion 44

REFERENCES 46

APPENDIX

APPENDIX A: QUESTIONAIRE 52

APPENDIX B: DATA OUTPUT SPSS 55

(13)

ix

LIST OF TABLE

3.1 Operational Definition 21

3.2 Measurement of Variables 22

4.1 Percentage of Response Rate 28

4.2 Analysis of Reliability Result 29

4.3 Respondent Profiling 30

4.4 Mean And Standard Deviation Values 31

4.5 Correlation Analysis Result 32

4.6 Model Summary 33

4.7 Annova Table 33

4.8 Coefficient Table 34

4.9 The Summary of Hypothesis Testing 34

(14)

x

LIST OF FIGURES

2.3 Framework 6

(15)

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Chapter one will discuss the study's background, the description of issues, the research concerns, research goals, and the significance of studies. The chapter will be discussing the nature and weaknesses of the report. A brief overview of the remaining parts will be given at the end of this chapter.

1.1 Background of Study

Job performance is seen as the primary factor in managing human resources (Organ & Paine, 1999).

Its assessment and review are capital for various organizational processes, such as selecting employees, compensation, and bonuses, or training. Whatever the assessment's intent, organizations need to provide reliable performance assessments and even better if they deliver the same results while saving time and effort (DeNisi & Murphy, 2017). Job performance is a collection of behaviors and not the factors deciding certain behaviors or their outcomes.

The definition is very flexible, as this is the only way to explain a phenomenon that differs significantly across jobs (Aguinis, 2013. Job performance, contextual success, and counterproductive work behavior are three great job success domains.(Sackett & Lievens, 2008). These dimensions together offer a relatively detailed and parsimonious approach to workers' overall performance (Dalal et al., 2012).Salgado and Cabal (2011) established a performance assessment according to public employees' level of accountability. Only two out of five task performance metrics were shared among high and low-level positions: technical knowledge and efficiency (both quantity and quality).

(16)

46

References

Anne Steinemann, Pawel Wargocki, Behzad Rismanchi (2016) ten questions concerning Green Buildings and Indoor Air Quality, Building and Environment,

Alan Hedge, Kimberly Rollings And Jeniffer Robinson (2010)

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting

Environmental Health and Safety Office, Research Administration, Emery University Anna Murray July 27, 2018, Green Building Boost Health Productivity and Value (Journal)

https://www.greenbiz.com/article/green-buildings-boost-health-productivity-and- Value-investors for the investor.

ASHRAE Board of Directors (2010), Ashrae Standard, Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-1992: Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, GA, 1992.

Caitlin Sass and John Smallwood., Melbourne 9-14 August 2015

The Role of Ergonomics in Green Building, Department of Construction Management, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University

Chua Lee Chuan (2006) Sample Size Estimation Using Krejcie and Morgan And

Cohen Statistical Power Analysis: A Comparison,Jabatan Penyelidikan,Jurnal Penyelidikan IPBL, Jilid 7.

Dirk A. Schwede Hillary Davies Brian Purdey

Occupant satisfaction with workplace design in the new and old environment

(17)

47

Facilities Vol 26 Iss 7/8,

De Silva S.² Effect of green building workplace environment on employee performance.Samaranayake Universiti Of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.

Davis, Donna & Golicic, Susan & Boerstler, Courtney. (2011). Benefits and Challenges of Conducting Multiple Methods Research in Marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 39. 467-479. 10.1007/s11747-010-0204-7.

Emin Kahya, (2007) A Study of Relationship between WBGT and Relative Humidity To

Worker Performance. Vol: 3, No: 3, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. The effects of job characteristics and working.

Frontczak, S.Schiavon², J.Goins², E.Arens², H.Zhang², P.Wargocki¹

Quantitative Relationships between Occupant Satisfaction and Satisfaction Aspects of Indoor Environment Quality and Building Design, International center for indoor environment and Energy, Department Of civil engineering, Technical University Of Denmark.

Godwin Uche Aliagha¹ Maizon Hashim² Afeez Olalekan Sanni ²* Kherun Nita Ali²

Review of Green Building Demand Factors for Malaysia,¹ Department of Real Estate, Faculty of Geoinformation and Real Estate, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia;² Department of Quantity Surveying, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia;*Corresponding Email Address: afeezsanni@yahoo.com

Guy R New Sham, Jeniffer A Veitch & Yitian. Effect On Green Building Certification On Organization Productivity Metrics.

Hasanthinka Diruksi,Harshini Mallawarachi Andgayani Karunasena

Application Of Green Building Concept To Enhance Indoor Environment Quality In Hospital Buildings. Department of Building Economics, Universiti of Moratuwa,

(18)

48

Sri Lanka.

Hedge. A & J.A. Dorsey B. (2012) Green Buildings Need Good Ergonomics

Department of Design and Environmental Analysis, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Sciences and Human Performance,

Ithaca College, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA.Published

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/terg20quianagough@comcast.net and Susan M. Davis, Bachelor of Commerce, University of British Columbia,

Hamed Taherdoost (2016) Sampling Methods in Research Methodology; How to Choose a Sampling Technique for Research.Research and Development Department, Hamta Business Solution Sdn Bhd Research and Development Department, Ahoora Ltd | Management Consultation Group.International Journal of Academic Research in

Management (IJARM) Vol. 5, No. 2, 2016,

Ismail, M. R. A. Rani, Z. K. M. Makhbul, M. J. M. Nor, and M. N. A. Rahman (2009) World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal Of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Judith Heerwagen, 18 oct 2010 “Green” ergonomics: Advocating for the human element in buildings, Green building,Organizational success and occupant productivity.

Jones A.P. (1999) Indoor air quality and health, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, NR4 7TJ, UK.Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999)

Jatin Pandey, (2018)"Factors affecting job performance: an integrative review of the literature", Kamaruzzaman S.N & N.A. Sabrani (2011) The Effect of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Towards

Occupants’ Psychological Performance in Office Buildings. Department of Building Surveying, Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur

syahrulnizam@um.edu.my.Vol:4

(19)

49

Kasper L.Jensen (2009) A Bayesian Network approach to the evaluation of building

Design and its consequences for employee performance and operational costs.Building and Environment

Kosonen R., TanF. b (2004), The Effect Of Perceived Indoor Air Quality On Productivity Loss, Energy and Buildings 36 (2004)

Michael F. Tuckera, Ronald Boniala, Ken Lahti (2004) the Definition, Measurement and Prediction of Intercultural Adjustment and Job Performance among Corporate Expatriates. Tucker International, LLC, the Lotus Building, 900 28th Street, Suite 200, Boulder, CO 80303, USA Colorado State University, USA

Naziatul syima mahbob¹, Syahrul nizam kamaruzaman¹,Nazian salleh¹, Raha sulaiman¹ A Correlations Studies of Indoor Environment Quality (Iaq) Towards Workplace Center Of Building Performance And Diagnostic.

Faculty Of Built Environment, Universiti Malaya Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Norm G. Miller (2010), PhD, Green Buildings and Productivity.University of San Diego, Burnham- Moores Quiana D. Gough, University of Baltimore,

Olof Mundt -Petersen Lars-Erik Harderup, PhD Jesper Arfvidsson, PhD (2013). Important

Factors. Affecting the Risk of Mold Growth inWell-Insulated Wood FrameWalls in Northern European Climates. Department of Building Physics at Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Stefan Rief, Mitja Jurecic (2006) Air Humidity In The Office Workplace.Study on the Significance of air humidity in the office.

Suhaida Mohd Sood, Dr. K. H. Chua, Dr. Leong Yow Peng (26-28/7/11),

(20)

50

Sustainable Development in the Building Sector: Green Building Framework in Malaysia, Institute of Energy Policy and Research, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, 43000 Kajang, Malaysia,

Sarasvathy Munisamy (2013) Identifying Factors That Influences Job Performance Amongst Employees In Oil Palm Plantation, Degree of Bachelor in Psychology, Faculty of Applied Social Sciences Open University Malaysia 2013.

Sergio Altomonte,Stefano Schiavon,Michael G. Kent & Gail Brager (2017)

Indoor Environmental Quality and Occupant Satisfaction In Green Building,

Sundell J. (2004),On The History Of Indoor Air Quality And Health,International Center for Indoor Environment and Energy, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark. Indoor Air 2004; 14 (Suppl 7)

Stephan J. Motowidlo and Harrison J. Kell (2012), Job Performance. Antecedents of Job Performance.

Warren L. Paul, Peter A. Taylor (2007)

A comparison of occupant comfort and satisfaction between a green building and a

Conventional building.Department of Environmental Management and Ecology, La Trobe University (Albury-Wodonga campus), P.O. Box 821, Wodonga, Victoria 3689, Australia.

Willard A. Wade III a, William A. Cote a & John E. Yocom,(2012),A Study of Indoor Air Quality, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association.

Wyon D. P.(2004) The effects of indoor air quality on performance and productivity.International Centre for Indoor Environment and Energy, Technical University of Denmark, Indoor Air 2004; 14 (Suppl 7

Zafir Mohamed Makhbul (2012), Workplace environment towards health and performance,

(21)

51

International Business Management 6(6):640-647, Faculty of Economics and Management,School of Management Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,43600 UKM Bangi, Malaysia.

Zafir Mohamed Makhbul (2012), Work Stress Issues in Malaysia

Faculty Of Economics And Management, School Of Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,43600 UKM Bangi Malaysia, Durrishah Idrus: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Zhonghua Gou. Human factors in Green building: Building types and users’ Needs

School of Engineering and Built environment, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD 4215,Australia,z.gou@griffith.edu.au

(22)

52

APPENDIX A: QUESTIONAIRE

INSTRUCTIONS: Please Cycle your answer in one of the indicators in scale

1) Gender:

[ 1 ] Male [ 2 ] Female 2) Marital Status:

[ 1 ] Single [ 2 ] Married [ 3 ] Others 3) Age:

[ 1 ] Below 25 years [ 2 ] 26 – 40 [ 3 ] 41 - 50 [ 4 ] above 51 years 4) Race:

[ 1 ] Malay [ 2 ] Chinese [ 3 ] Indians [ 4 ] Others 5) Length of Service:

[ 1 ] Below 2 years [ 2 ] 2 – 5 years [ 3 ] 6 – 10 years [ 4 ] 11 – 15 years [ 5 ] 16 – 20 years [ 6 ] > 21 years

SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

(23)

53

Using the scale 1 to 5 as below, please read all the questions carefully and mark your answer (√) in the box provided for each question.

Scale 1 2 3 4 5

Answer Option

Strongly disagree

Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly

agree

Relative Humidity

1. Organization’s internal temperature is too hot. (Negative Statement) (Recode)

1 2 3 4 5

2. There is too little air movement in this organization.

(Negative Statement) (Recode)

1 2 3 4 5

3 The organization’s is too dry. (Negative Statement) (Recode)

1 2 3 4 5

4 There is an unpleasant odour in the organization. (Negative Statement) (Recode)

1 2 3 4 5

5 The organization’s air is stale. (Negative Statement) (Recode)

1 2 3 4 5

Acoustic

1. The noise level in my work area is satisfactory 1 2 3 4 5 2 The workstation environment does not face any noise

problem

1 2 3 4 5

3 Organization strive to minimize the noise level in my workstation area. (Negative Statement) (Recode)

1 2 3 4 5

Lighting

1. The illumination at my work area is satisfactory 1 2 3 4 5 2. Organisation provides a flexible lighting system 1 2 3 4 5 3. The bright lighting increases my job performance 1 2 3 4 5 4. The bright lighting increases my job performance 1 2 3 4 5 5. The organization always ensures that I get lighting while

performing my task

1 2 3 4 5

SECTION B: WORKPLACE DESIGN FEATURES

(24)

54

Using the scale 1 to 5 as below, please read all the questions carefully and mark your answer (√)

in the box provided for each question.

Scale 1 2 3 4 5

Answer Option

Extremely Poor

Below Average

Average Above Average

Excellent

Num. Statement Response

1

How do you rate yourself in terms of the quantity of

work you have achieved? 1 2 3 4 5

2

How do you evaluate yourself in terms of your ability

to achieve a goal? 1 2 3 4 5

3

How do you assess among colleagues in terms of job

performance in the department? 1 2 3 4 5

4

How do you evaluate quality in terms of performance

involving customer relationships? 1 2 3 4 5

5

How do you evaluate your self-esteem in terms of time management, capacity planning and spending management?

1 2 3 4 5

6

How do you evaluate your performance on your product/service, department, rivals and customer needs?

1 2 3 4 5

END OF QUESTIONS THANK YOU

SECTION C: JOB PERFORMANCE

(25)

55

APPENDIX B: DATA OUTPUT SPSS

Correlations Relative_H

umidity

Acoustic Lighting Job_Perfor mance

Relative_Humidity

Pearson Correlation 1 .451^** .178^* .372^**

Sig. (1-tailed) .000 .031 .000

N 110 110 110 110

Acoustic

Pearson Correlation .451^** 1 .356^** .464^**

Sig. (1-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 110 110 110 110

Lighting

Pearson Correlation .178^* .356^** 1 .397^**

Sig. (1-tailed) .031 .000 .000

N 110 110 110 110

Job_Performance

Pearson Correlation .372^** .464^** .397^** 1

Sig. (1-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 110 110 110 110

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).

Regression

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std.

Deviation N

Job_Performance 17.0636 2.93125 110 Relative_Humidity 17.4000 3.20607 110

Acoustic 8.5091 2.30574 110

Lighting 16.5545 3.52862 110

(26)

56 Correlations

Job_Perfor mance

Relative_H umidity

Acoustic Lighting

Pearson Correlation

Job_Performance 1.000 .372 .464 .397

Relative_Humidity .372 1.000 .451 .178

Acoustic .464 .451 1.000 .356

Lighting .397 .178 .356 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed)

Job_Performance . .000 .000 .000

Relative_Humidity .000 . .000 .031

Acoustic .000 .000 . .000

Lighting .000 .031 .000 .

N

Job_Performance 110 110 110 110

Relative_Humidity 110 110 110 110

Acoustic 110 110 110 110

Lighting 110 110 110 110

Variables Entered/Removed Model Variables

Entered

Variables Removed

Method

1

Lighting, Relative_H umidity, Acoustic

. Enter

a. Dependent Variable: Job_Performance b. All requested variables entered.

(27)

57

Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. An error of the

Estimate

Change Statistics R Square

Change

F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change

1 .555^a .308 .288 2.47333 .308 15.699 3 106 .000

a. Predictors: (Constant), Lighting, Relative_Humidity, Acoustic b. Dependent Variable: Job_Performance

ANOVA^a

Model Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F Sig.

1

Regression 288.114 3 96.038 15.699 .000^b

Residual 648.441 106 6.117

Total 936.555 109

a. Dependent Variable: Job_Performance

b. Predictors: (Constant), Lighting, Relative_Humidity, Acoustic

Coefficients

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardiz ed Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1

(Constant) 19.670 2.050 9.597 .000

Relative_Humidity .181 .083 .198 2.191 .031

Acoustic .357 .121 .281 2.946 .004

Lighting .217 .072 .261 3.018 .003

Residuals Statistics

Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

Deviation N

Predicted Value 11.5794 21.3049 17.0636 1.62581 110

Residual 7.82921 7.65052 .00000 2.43906 110

Std. Predicted Value 3.373 2.609 .000 1.000 110

Std. Residual 3.165 3.093 .000 .986 110

(28)

58

Reliability

Case Processing Summary

N %

Cases

Valid 110 100.0

Excluded 0 .0

Total 110 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's

Alpha

Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardize

d Items

N of Items

.790 .793 5

Item Statistics Mean Std.

Deviation N

JP1 3.20 .799 110

JP2 3.32 .789 110

JP3 3.35 .773 110

JP4 3.52 .739 110

JP5 3.67 .869 110

Summary Item Statistics

Mean Minimum Maximum Range Maximum / Minimum

Variance N of Items

Item Means 3.413 3.200 3.673 .473 1.148 .034 5

Item Variances .632 .546 .754 .209 1.383 .006 5

Item-Total Statistics

(29)

59 Scale

Mean if Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-Total Correlation

Squared Multiple Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha if

Item Deleted

JP1 13.86 6.229 .432 .202 .794

JP2 13.75 5.641 .621 .548 .734

JP3 13.71 5.438 .709 .604 .705

JP4 13.55 6.030 .556 .324 .755

JP5 13.39 5.598 .545 .318 .761

Scale Statistics Mean Variance Std.

Deviation

N of Items

17.06 8.592 2.931 5

Reliability (Pilot test)

N %

Cases

Valid 110 100.0

Excluded 0 .0

Total 110 100.0

Alpha

d Items

N of Items

.751 .779 5

(30)

60 Item Statistics

Mean Std.

Deviation N

RH1 4.08 .910 110

RH2 3.16 1.054 110

RH3 3.30 .944 110

RH4 2.74 .864 110

RH5 4.12 .906 110

Variance N of Items

Item Means 3.480 2.736 4.118 1.382 1.505 .364 5

Item Variances .879 .746 1.111 .364 1.488 .019 5

Item-Total Statistics Scale

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Cronbach's Alpha if

Item Deleted

RH1 13.32 7.283 .441 .276 .680

RH2 14.24 6.641 .465 .285 .674

RH3 14.10 6.806 .524 .323 .647

RH4 14.66 7.234 .494 .274 .661

RH5 13.28 7.268 .448 .297 .677

(31)

61 Scale Statistics

Mean Variance Std.

Deviation

N of Items

17.40 10.279 3.206 5

Scale: Acoustic Quality (Pilot Test)

N %

Cases

Valid 110 100.0

Excluded 0 .0

Total 110 100.0

Alpha

d Items

N of Items

.638 .642 3

Deviation N

AQ1 2.13 1.068 110

AQ2 3.07 1.038 110

AQ3 3.31 .843 110

Variance N of Items

(32)

62

Item Means 2.836 2.127 3.309 1.182 1.556 .391 3

Item Variances .976 .711 1.140 .429 1.603 .054 3

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Cronbach's Alpha if

Item Deleted

AQ1 6.38 2.715 .415 .174 .683

AQ2 5.44 2.450 .551 .331 .489

AQ3 5.20 3.079 .516 .300 .560

Deviation

N of Items

8.51 5.316 2.306 3

Scale: Lighting (Pilot Test)

N %

Cases

Valid 110 100.0

Excluded 0 .0

Total 110 100.0

Alpha

d Items

N of Items

.878 .890 5

(33)

63 Item Statistics

Mean Std.

Deviation N

LG1 3.11 .850 110

LG2 3.31 .854 110

LG3 3.30 .761 110

LG4 3.43 .829 110

LG5 3.41 .827 110

Variance N of Items

Item Means 3.311 3.109 3.427 .318 1.102 .016 5

Item Variances .680 .579 .729 .150 1.260 .004 5

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Cronbach's Alpha if

Item Deleted

LG1 13.45 8.708 .602 .445 .923

LG2 13.25 7.930 .788 .637 .884

LG3 13.25 8.173 .850 .741 .873

LG4 13.13 8.039 .792 .755 .883

LG5 13.15 7.905 .830 .785 .875

Deviation

N of Items

16.55 12.451 3.529 5