M.G.Mohamed Thariq et al. AJE Vol.9 2009 79-98
94
sensation of relaxation is partially emotional. The previous finding in this study indicated that the sensation of relaxation was partially emotional and partially
affected by biomechanical factors. However, in this and previous sections, higher discomfort factors level have been demonstrated to be dominant over higher levels
of relaxation while sitting. The association of discomfort factors level 6 and relaxation level 7 was not expected. Therefore, the mean discomfort obtained was
inconsistent; this inconsistent result will be explained later in this paper. The results are consistent those of Thariq and Munasinghe under review.
Table 11. Interactions of impression with discomfort factors average ratings of discomfort
factors in discomfort perception
Discomfort factor level Impression
Level 1 2 3 4 5 6
1
1.0 1.0 4.3 -- 6.0 --
2 3.0 2.0 2.9 4.3 4.5 --
3 2.0 3.6 3.1 4.0 6.0 --
4 1.2 2.2 3.4 4.4 5.6 --
5 1.6 2.7 3.1 4.6 -- 4.0
6 1.5 2.0 2.8 6.0 -- --
7 1.0 3.0 -- -- 6.0 --
Note: ‘--‘ means combination of factors was not observed .
Table 12. Interactions of relaxation with discomfort factors average ratings of discomfort
factors in discomfort perception
Discomfort factor level Relaxation
Level 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 -- -- 4.0
-- 6.0
--
2 3.0 2.0 1.7 5.0 5.4 --
3 2.0 3.7 3.3 4.3 5.3 --
4
1.3 2.4 3.6 4.2 5.0 --
5 1.6 2.1 2.6 4.4 6.0 --
6 1.5 2.0 3.0 5.0 6.0 --
7 1.0 2.3 -- -- -- 4.0
Note: ‘--‘ means combination of factors was not observed .
Table 13.
Interactions of relief with discomfort factors average ratings of discomfort factors in discomfort perception
Discomfort factor level Relief
Level 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 -- -- 5.0 -- 6.0 --
2 -- 3.0 3.3 4.7 5.2 --
3
-- 3.0 3.1 4.1 5.5 --
4 1.3 2.3 3.6 4.4 5.0 4.0
5 1.7 2.0 2.7 4.5 6.0 --
6 2.0 2.0 2.7 -- 6.0 --
7 1.0 3.3 2.0 -- -- --
Note: ‘--‘ means combination of factors was not observed .
Laboratory Study of Factors Affecting Sitting Comfort and Discomfort
95
3.11. Interaction of discomfort factors with relief in discomfort perception
Generally, the results obtained showed that as discomfort factors level increased, mean discomfort level increased while interacting with different levels of
relief Table 13. When the discomfort factors level was above 4, mean discomfort perception was also above 4 while at different levels of relief Table 13. The results
suggest that when the discomfort factors level is high, sitters always perceive discomfort, so the presence of higher levels of relief becomes secondary.
Discomfort factors level 5 in association with relief level 1, 3, 5 and 6 all produced mean discomfort 5.5 or more. Discomfort factors level 4 in association
with relief levels 2 and 5 produced mean discomfort of 4.7 and 4.5 respectively. Discomfort factors level 3 in association with relief levels 1 produced mean
discomfort of 5.0. The mean discomfort levels presented were higher than the corresponding discomfort factors levels. These were unexpected results, and again
suggest that some other factors contributed to the higher level of discomfort perception.
Discomfort factors level 6 in association with relief level 4 produced mean discomfort of 4.0. The results suggest that discomfort perception tends to be affected
by the feeling of relief. This result was not expected. In previous sections a higher discomfort factor level was demonstrated to be dominant over a higher level of
comfort factors, and that the interaction of discomfort factors with the feeling relief on discomfort perception was not significant. However, the result presented may
support the previous findings in this study that the relief sensation is partially emotional. Although the higher level of relief affected discomfort perception, the
mean discomfort level produced was found in the discomfort stage. These are almost consistent with those of Thariq and Munasinghe under review.
A few inconsistent results i.e. mean comfort were observed in the interactions. Variability in subjective ratings may be the reasons for such inconsistent results.
Variability in subjective ratings indicates that other important factors affect the subjective responses Kyung et al., 2007. This may be a limitation to this study.
However, this limitation did not affect the overall results obtained through subjective ratings.
3.12. Proposed comfortdiscomfort model
Based on the findings of the interactions of discomfort factors with impression, relaxation and relief in perceiving comfort and discomfort in sitting under
laboratory conditions, the following model is proposed Figure 4. Transition from comfort to discomfort or discomfort to comfort occurs in three states: comfort
↔ neutral
↔ discomfort. In the neutral zone, neither comfort nor discomfort factors dominate the perception; therefore, reported comfort and discomfort often differ
among individuals. Vink et al. 2005 referred this state as ‘no discomfort’ in which the participant is not aware of either discomfort or comfort, or that no discomfort
exists. Comfort factors levels from 1 to 5 and discomfort factor levels from 1 to 4 can co-exist at the same time in the non-dominant zone Hence, the non-dominant zone
