Cited by 263Building Energy and Comfort OptimizationThermoregulation and physiological responsesUrban Heat Island Mitigation

Thermal pleasure in built environments: physiology of alliesthesia

Parkinson, Thomas, de Dear, Richard·2015·Building Research & Information

Abstract

International standards that define thermal comfort in uniform environments are based on the steady-state heat balance equation that posits ‘neutrality’ as the optimal occupant comfort state for which environments are designed. But thermal perception is more than an outcome of a deterministic, steady-state heat balance. Thermal alliesthesia is a conceptual framework to understand the hedonics of a much larger spectrum of thermal environments than the more thoroughly researched concept of thermal neutrality. At its simplest, thermal alliesthesia states that the hedonic qualities of the thermal environment are determined as much by the general thermal state of the subject as by the environment itself. A peripheral thermal stimulus that offsets or counters a thermoregulatory load-error will be pleasantly perceived and vice versa, a stimulus that exacerbates thermoregulatory load-error will feel unpleasant. The present paper elaborates the thermophysiological hypothesis of alliesthesia with a particular focus on set-point control and the origins of thermoregulatory load-error signals, and then discusses them within the broader context of thermal pleasure. Alliesthesia provides an overarching framework within which diverse and previously disconnected findings of laboratory experiments, field studies and even comfort standards spanning the last 40 years of thermal comfort research can be more coherently understood.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09613218.2015.989662

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People accept much broader thermal conditions than anticipated by standards, and their perception of thermal conditions is much more dynamic.

    “At the same time, research has shown that people accept much broader thermal conditions than anticipated by above standards [1,3,14,47], andtheir perception of thermal conditions is much more dynamic [48–51].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parkinson, T., & de Dear, R.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Faculty of Architecture, Design and Planning, University of Sydney, Wilkinson Building (G04), 148 City Road, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Corresponding author
Parkinson, Thomas
Venue
Building Research & Information
Published
2014-12-15
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
288-301
ISSN
  • 0961-3218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-4321
OpenAlex
W2009430819
Cited by
263
References
96
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 7
FWCI
16.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Building Research & Information (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of California Berkeley
  • University of Wollongong
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Building Energy and Comfort Optimization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Thermoregulation and physiological responses
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Heat Island Mitigation
Keywords
thermal comfort, thermoneutrality, set-point control, thermal sensation, comfort standards, built environment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review