Department of Geography, Beit Berl Academic College, Israel; The Porter School of the Environment and Earth Sciences, Department of Geography Tel Aviv University.
The Porter School of the Environment and Earth Sciences, Department of Geography Tel Aviv University.
Sci Total Environ. 2022 Aug 10;833:155128. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155128. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
Since the early 2000's, much attention has been paid to human thermal assessment in urban outdoor environments in different climatic zones. Some previous studies have argued that an absence of an agreed protocol for outdoor human bio-meteorological research causes complexity in comparing the studies' results for several reasons: An abundance of human thermal indices, a variety of interpretations of bio-meteorological terms, an array of procedures for data collection and a lack of agreed methods in determining thermal comfort ranges and index modifications. This study aims to review strategies and methods for human bio-meteorological research and to examine their suitability for thermal perception assessment. From 2001 to 2021, 254 case studies assessed human thermal perception by investigating in-situ thermal conditions versus subjective thermal perception, relying on protocols such as ASHRAE Standard 55 and EN ISO 10551 that were originally developed for indoor environments. Fifty-four cases determined different ranges for thermal comfort. Although 43 studies tried to modify indices to various climatic zones, only 13 studies modified the nine PET physiological stress categories and 4 studies modified the ten UTCI stress categories). Thus, comparisons between the studies' results become complicated. Our review points to three main reasons for the complexity: first, the 7-point TSV scales, does not always fit the scales of the applied thermal index; second, measurement procedures do not always represent the local climate conditions; third, certain methods for modifying thermal index scale thresholds are not capable of modifying the entire index scale. On the basis of our findings, we suggest a framework for bio-meteorological research, with attention to measurement procedure, appropriate questionnaire design, careful data control and suitable methods to enable modification of thermal indices. This study recommends applying systematic and objective statistical methods like linear regression and discriminant analysis in order to successfully modify the entire index scale.
自 21 世纪初以来，不同气候带的城市户外环境中的人体热评估受到了广泛关注。一些先前的研究认为，由于缺乏户外人体生物气象学研究的协议，导致研究结果难以比较，原因有以下几点：大量的人体热指数、生物气象学术语的多种解释、数据收集程序的多样性以及确定热舒适范围和指数修正的方法缺乏一致性。本研究旨在综述人体生物气象学研究的策略和方法，并检验它们在热感觉评估中的适用性。2001 年至 2021 年期间，有 254 项案例研究通过调查现场热条件与主观热感觉来评估人体热感觉，这些研究依赖于 ASHRAE 标准 55 和 EN ISO 10551 等协议，这些协议最初是为室内环境制定的。其中 54 项案例确定了不同的热舒适范围。尽管有 43 项研究试图针对不同的气候带修正指数，但只有 13 项研究修正了 9 个 PET 生理应激类别，4 项研究修正了 10 个 UTCI 应激类别）。因此，研究结果之间的比较变得复杂。我们的综述指出了复杂性的三个主要原因：首先，7 点 TSV 量表并不总是符合应用热指数的量表；其次，测量程序并不总是代表当地的气候条件；第三，某些修正热指数尺度阈值的方法不能修正整个指数尺度。基于我们的研究结果，我们提出了一个生物气象学研究框架，重点是测量程序、适当的问卷设计、仔细的数据控制和适合的方法来修正热指数。本研究建议应用线性回归和判别分析等系统和客观的统计方法，以成功修正整个指数尺度。
