English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Recently, more consideration is being given to the beneficial effects of lighting on the maintenance and promotion of the health and well-being of office occupants in built environments. A new lighting technology using Rayleigh scattering has made it possible to simulate a blue sky. However, to date, no studies have examined the possible beneficial effects of such artificial skylights. The aims of this study were to examine the non-visual effects of artificial skylights and conventional fluorescent lights in a simulated office environment and to clarify the feature effects of the artificial skylights.    Methods  Participants were 10 healthy male adults. Non-visual effects were evaluated based on brain arousal levels ( α -wave ratio and contingent negative variation [CNV]), autonomic nervous activity (heart rate variability [HRV]), work performance, and subjective responses during daytime exposure to either an artificial skylight or fluorescent lights, as well as nocturnal melatonin secretion.    Results  Subjective evaluations of both room lighting-related “natural” and “attractive” items and the “connected to nature” item were significantly higher with the skylight than with the fluorescent lights. Cortical arousal levels obtained from the early component of the CNV amplitude were significantly lower with the skylight than with the fluorescent lights, whereas  α -wave ratio and work performance were similar between the two light sources. The HRV evaluation showed that sympathetic nerve tone was lower and parasympathetic nerve tone was higher, both significantly, for the skylight than for the fluorescent lights during daytime. Nocturnal melatonin secretion was significantly greater before and during light exposure at night under the daytime skylight than under the fluorescent lights.    Conclusions  Our results suggest that artificial skylights have some advantages over conventional fluorescent lights in maintaining ordinary work performance during daytime with less psychological and physiological stress. The findings also suggest that the artificial skylights would enable built environments to maintain long-term comfort and productivity.

Non-visual effects of diurnal exposure to an artificial skylight, including nocturnal melatonin suppression