This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Despite extensive research on the influence of office environments on occupant health, the sensory mechanisms through which workplaces influence psychophysiological stress remain poorly understood, particularly beyond visual and acoustic factors. This pilot study examined how olfactory and tactile qualities of office environments influence psychophysiological stress using a neurophenomenology-informed approach that integrates physiological measures with experiential data. Participants were exposed to four simulated office environments varying in materiality (hard versus soft) and scent (present versus absent). Heart rate variability, electrodermal activity, affective ratings and phenomenology-informed accounts were collected using a neurophenomenology-informed framework adapted for an applied workplace setting. Preliminary findings suggested greater autonomic differentiation by materiality than by scent, with soft home-like settings showing higher physiological arousal than hard, utilitarian environments. Exploratory time-resolved analyses further suggest that scent-related responses may depend on the broader material context, which may suggest a response to interior atmosphere rather than specific sensory qualities. Phenomenology-informed accounts provided interpretive context, indicating possible task–environment incongruence, comfort–focus trade-offs, and symbolic meanings associated with homey versus utilitarian settings. Given the small pilot sample, these findings should be considered exploratory and hypothesis generating, and require replication in larger, adequately powered studies. Nevertheless, the results indicate that everyday sensory qualities of office environments may be associated with subtle physiological responses that are not readily captured through self-report or neurophysiological measures in isolation. The study therefore demonstrates the potential value of integrating physiological and experiential data within a neurophenomenology-informed framework for applied workplace research.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schuller et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: