Abstract:The expansion of renewable electricity generation, growing demands due to electrification, greater prevalence of working from home, and increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events, will place new demands on the electric supply and distribution grid. Broader adoption of demand response programs (DRPs) for the residential sector may help meet these challenges; however, experience shows that occupant overrides in DRPs compromises their effectiveness. There is a lack of formal understanding of how discomfort, routines, and other motivations affect DRP overrides and other related human building interactions (HBI). This paper reports preliminary findings from a study of 20 households in Colorado and Massachusetts, US…
Abstract:The expansion of renewable electricity generation, growing demands due to electrification, greater prevalence of working from home, and increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events, will place new demands on the electric supply and distribution grid. Broader adoption of demand response programs (DRPs) for the residential sector may help meet these challenges; however, experience shows that occupant overrides in DRPs compromises their effectiveness. There is a lack of formal understanding of how discomfort, routines, and other motivations affect DRP overrides and other related human building interactions (HBI). This paper reports preliminary findings from a study of 20 households in Colorado and Massachusetts, US over three months. Participants responded to ecological momentary assessments (EMA) triggered by thermostat interactions and at random times throughout the day. EMAs included Likert-scale questions of thermal preference, preference intensity, and changes to 7 different activity types that could affect thermal comfort, and an opened ended question about motivations of such actions. Twelve tags were developed to categorize motivation responses and analyzed statistically to identify associations between motivations, preferences, and HBI actions. Reactions to changes in the thermal environment were the most frequently observed motivation, 118 of 220 responses. On the other hand, 47% responses were at least partially motivated by non-thermal factors, suggesting limited utility for occupant behavior models founded solely on thermal comfort. Changes in activity level and clothing were less likely to be reported when EMAs were triggered by thermostat interactions, while fan interactions were more likely. Windows, shades, and portable heater interactions had no significant dependence on how the EMA was triggered.
| Subjects: | Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Systems and Control (eess.SY) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2511.10467 [cs.HC] |
| (or arXiv:2511.10467v1 [cs.HC] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.10467 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) | |
| Journal reference: | Comfort at the Extremes (CATE). Seville, Spain. November 2024 |
Submission history
From: Michael Kane [view email] [v1] Thu, 13 Nov 2025 16:33:36 UTC (657 KB)