Inside Out: Perceptions and Realities of Ambient Pollution and Indoor Air Quality in Four Office Buildings in the United States

Despite increasing awareness of the health risks associated with long‐term exposure to poor‐quality indoor air, many Americans often perceive ambient (outdoor) air pollution as a more significant threat. This perception is deeply rooted in historical fears, despite modern construction practices mitigating many of these risks. Although indoor air quality has only recently gained significant attention, it is a critical determinant of occupant satisfaction, well‐being, and health. This paper challenges two prevalent misconceptions about air quality in urban spaces: (1) That indoor air is always cleaner than ambient air, and (2) that poor indoor air is primarily caused by external, ambient sources. By analyzing both indoor and ambient air quality data from four urban office buildings in the US Southeast and Mid‐Atlantic region (Atlanta, Charlotte, Durham, and Washington, DC) alongside qualitative feedback, the study reveals that indoor air was only categorized as better than ambient air for 59.2% of working hours during the 12‐month period. While indoor air generally performed better than ambient air, significant fluctuations were observed, and in some cases, ambient air was cleaner than indoor air. Furthermore, the data showed that indoor pollution was more often influenced by internal factors, such as building materials, equipment, and occupant activities, rather than by external pollutants. The findings underscore the need for ongoing management of indoor sources of pollution, particularly in high‐performance environments. This research provides a comprehensive understanding of the complex relationship between perceived and measured air quality, advocating for a more nuanced approach to improving occupant health and satisfaction in urban office environments.