READ the ROOM
Issue 001: Welcome to Evidence-Based Design
Welcome to the Room!
If you're reading this, you signed up at some point, maybe after you heard me speak, maybe through my website, and then heard absolutely nothing from me. Oops. But I’m here now!
This is Read the Room: a brand-new weekly science newsletter of evidence-based design research written for design professionals.
I’ve worked as a researcher for three of the Top 10 design firms in the world. And at every single one, even the most talented designers could not access valuable research to improve their practice.
Every week I'll pull from peer-reviewed design research, and tell you what it actually means for your projects. No jargon. No journal paywalls. Maybe some interviews with authors? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves yet ;)
Warmest welcome,
Dr. Kati Peditto
WEEKLY FEATURED STUDY
A window changed everything. Maybe? Probably.
If you’ve seen me speak, you’ve probably seen this slide. I talk about this study a lot. So I figured it was a good place to start for our first newsletter. An oldie but a goodie, as they say.
In 1984, Roger Ulrich published a study in Science that is widely considered the founding document of evidence-based design. The experimental design was SO simple and elegant: the study compared surgical recovery outcomes for patients in a Pennsylvania hospital based on a single variable. Whether their window faced a brick wall or the trees in the hospital garden.
The results were pretty remarkable. Patients with the tree view had shorter post-op stays, required less pain medication, and received fewer negative evaluations from nurses (things like “cries a lot” or “needs encouragement.”) Tree-view patients needed an average of 2.96 doses of strong painkillers. Wall-view patients needed 4.01 doses. A 35% difference. And the only (apparent) difference was the window view. No wonder it was published in one of the most widely-respected academic journals of all time.
But I always include a caveat about this study. It’s never been replicated. The field of evidence-based design was built on a study of just 46 patients. n=23 per group. Just a single retrospective review of hospital records at a single Pennsylvania hospital, one surgery type, one very specific comparison: trees versus a veerrrrry blank brick wall. The Center for Health Design noted the conclusions can't be extended to other types of built views. Nobody has run the same study again with a direct replication design. One subsequent ICU study found no significant window effect at all.
And yet it has been cited literally thousands of times and shaped how hospitals around the world are designed. I hear about this study CONSTANTLY.
I'm definitely not saying Dr. Ulrich was wrong (and if you’re reading this, hi omg!) The broader research linking nature exposure to positive human outcomes is quite substantial. But the next time someone in a project meeting cites this singular paper as proof, it's worth knowing that we’ve never confirmed the results. (And we also tend to avoid the word “proof” in science for that exact reason.)
That’s just a taste of what’s to come in this newsletter - the assumptions we make as designers vs. the research to actually support design excellence.
RESEARCH TO EXPLORE
AKA: I downloaded these papers and vetted them, so you don’t have to.
THE O.G. E.B.D. PAPER
Ulrich's 1984 paper is two pages long and very readable. If you've never read the original (not a summary of it, the actual paper) it's worth ten minutes.
PUMP THE BRAKES
A team at Columbia University put Ulrich’s study to the test. 789 ICU patients, half received a window view. Think Ulrich’s original findings hold up?
IN THE WORKPLACE
In a study of 900+ office workers in Seoul, those with forest views from their workplace windows reported significantly higher job satisfaction and lower job stress than those without, and the effect held regardless of gender, age, or job category.
IN CLASSROOMS
German primary school students in classrooms with more natural window views reported less stress and better ability to concentrate, though the natural views didn't translate to measurably better performance on a standardized attention test.
A Final Note
RESEARCH WORKS BEST IN COMMUNITY
If you found this valuable, forward it to one person in your firm who should be reading it. That's the whole ask this week!
To work with me on an upcoming project or speaking engagement, reply to this email or visit katipeditto.com.
Until next week,
Dr. Kati Peditto