Purpose – This study investigates how office architectural archetypes influence practitioners' self-perceived efficacy and emotional exhaustion within the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, testing the moderating role of Big Five personality traits. Design/methodology/approach – A quasi-experimental within-subject study was conducted with 150 licensed mental health practitioners. Participants evaluated standardized 3D visualisations of four office archetypes ("Minimalist," "Biophilic," "Classic," "Chaotic") presented in a counterbalanced sequence, alongside Big Five Inventory assessments. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and Pearson correlations. Findings – Architectural archetypes exerted significant main effects across all metrics (p < 0.001). Biophilic design yielded the highest comfort (M = 6.21) and efficacy (M = 6.05), with the lowest burnout risk (M = 1.87). Chaotic environments acted as severe stressors (burnout risk M = 5.98). Neuroticism (r = 0.58) and Conscientiousness (r = 0.62) exacerbated distress in chaotic spaces, while Openness predicted Minimalist preferences (r = 0.35). Research limitations/implications – Relies on static 3D visualisations and a single cultural sample; future research should utilize virtual reality and longitudinal physiological tracking in clinical facilities. Practical implications – Positions workspace design as a proactive OSH engineering control, guiding facility managers to optimize physical environments, conserve clinician energy, and reduce burnout-related turnover costs. Social implications – Protecting clinician mental well-being enhances healthcare infrastructure resilience and service quality, supporting UN Sustainable Development Goal 3. Originality/value – Bridges environmental psychology and strategic facilities management, delivering an empirical Person-Environment fit framework for preventing clinician burnout through restorative physical spaces.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gorbenko et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: