论文部分内容阅读
[背景]室内较高的二氧化碳(CO2)浓度与工作表现受损、躯体症状增加以及感知空气质量较差之间的关联,归因于室内CO2与其他室内空气污染物浓度的相互关系,同时也受到室外空气流入率的影响。[目的]评估在室内浓度的范围内,CO2浓度升高对决策表现的直接影响。[方法]24名受试者分为6组,在一间类似办公室的房间内暴露于体积比为8.6×10-4、1×10-4、2.5×10-4的CO2。各组分3个2.5h的阶段接受暴露,均在1d内进行,各组暴露顺序均衡。体积比为0.6×10-4时,CO2来自室外空气和受试者的呼吸。通过注入超纯CO2获得较高浓度的CO2。通风率和温度恒定。在每种条件下,受试者完成对于决策表现的电脑测试,以及关于躯体症状和所感知空气质量的问卷调查。受试者及决策测试的管理人员均不知道CO2浓度。数据分析采用方差模型。[结果]相对于体积比为0.6×10-4,当CO2体积比为1×10-4时,9个决策表现量表中有6个呈统计学显著性的下降。当CO2体积比为2.5×10-4时,有7个决策表现量表呈现更大的、具有统计学显著性的下降(原始分数比例,0.06~0.56),但是在行动性量表上的表现得分增加。[结论]CO2对人们工作表现的直接负面影响可能具有重要的经济学意义,并可能会使建筑物中人均室外空气流入量所能减少的能源消耗量受到限制。这些研究结果还需要进一步确认。
[Background] The association of higher indoor CO2 concentrations with impaired performance, increased somatic symptoms, and poor perceived air quality is attributed to the interplay between indoor CO2 and other indoor air pollutant concentrations, Affected by the inflow rate of outdoor air. [Objective] To evaluate the direct effect of increasing CO2 concentration on performance of decision-making within the range of indoor concentration. [Methods] Twenty-four subjects were divided into six groups and exposed to CO2 in a volumetric ratio of 8.6 × 10 -4, 1 × 10 -4, and 2.5 × 10 -4 in a room similar to an office. The three components of 2.5h exposure stage, were carried out within 1d, the order of exposure of each group is balanced. When the volume ratio is 0.6 × 10 -4, CO 2 comes from the outdoor air and the subject’s breathing. Higher concentrations of CO2 are obtained by injecting ultrapure CO2. Ventilation rate and temperature are constant. Under each condition, subjects completed computer tests on decision performance and a questionnaire on somatic symptoms and perceived air quality. None of the subjects and decision-making managers knew the CO2 concentration. Data analysis using the variance model. [Result] Compared with the volume ratio of 0.6 × 10-4, when the CO2 volume ratio was 1 × 10-4, six of the nine decision making scales showed a statistically significant decrease. At a CO2 volume ratio of 2.5 × 10-4, 7 decision performance scales showed a larger, statistically significant decrease (the original fractional ratio, 0.06-0.56), but the performance on the mobility scale Score increased. [Conclusions] The direct negative impact of CO2 on the performance of people may have important economic significance and may limit the energy consumption that can be reduced by the per capita outdoor air inflow in buildings. These findings need further confirmation.