Indoor-environment research maps bodily responses and measurement gaps
A review of studies in everyday indoor settings found thermal comfort was the most studied feature, with reported links to heart activity and skin temperature. These measurements alone do not establish better well-being.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
The review examined how researchers study indoor conditions and well-being through bodily measurements, including heart rate, skin temperature and brain activity. Thermal comfort received the most attention, while noise was absent as a studied variable in the reviewed research. The abstract describes research methods and gaps rather than demonstrating that particular indoor designs improve health.
The abstract provides no study counts, participant details, effect estimates or directions of change. It cannot establish which indoor conditions improve well-being or whether bodily signals consistently reflect psychological outcomes.
What bodily measurements can show
The reviewed studies recorded signals such as heart activity and skin temperature to investigate responses to indoor conditions. These measurements describe bodily responses; they should not automatically be presented as evidence of better health or well-being.
What the authors want standardized
The authors identified a need for shared well-being assessment tools and measurements that capture several bodily signals together. These are proposals for improving research methods, rather than tested changes to buildings.
The original publication
Neuroscientific Insights into the Built Environment: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research on Indoor Environmental Quality, Physiological Dynamics, and Psychological Well-Being in Real-Life Contexts.
Grasso-Cladera A, Arenas-Perez M, Wegertseder-Martinez P et al.
Int J Environ Res Public Health · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 40566252
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.