Indoor environmental quality in home offices: A proof-of-concept study on pleasure and discomfort

• Mixed-method field study of thermal, visual, acoustic, and air quality at WfH • Discomfort vs. pleasure reports 4:1, mainly due to thermal and AIQ conditions • Pleasure was rare, pointing to sensory under-stimulation in home offices • HRV (RMSSD) showed non-linear and interactive effects, esp. temp and CO₂ • Multi-domain assessments linking IEQ, experiences and physiology are stressed The shift toward work-from-home (WfH) has foregrounded the importance of Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) in residential settings. While IEQ’s influence on comfort is well-documented in offices, its impact on well-being and physiological stress during WfH remains underexplored. This study investigates how thermal, visual, acoustic, and air-quality factors relate to perceived comfort, pleasure, and autonomic responses measured through heart rate variability (HRV) and blood pressure (BP). A mixed-methods proof-of-concept study with 14 participants WfH over 3.5 days each, combined continuous multi-sensor IEQ monitoring with wearable HRV (root mean square of successive differences; RMSSD) and ambulatory BP data. Subjective experiences were logged through diaries, activity logs, and post-study interviews. Mixed-effects models were applied to evaluate associations between IEQ, reported sensations, and physiological responses. Discomfort was reported four times more often than pleasure, predominantly triggered by thermal and air-quality conditions. Pleasure, though rare, was linked to multi-sensory stimuli such as sunlight and fresh air, suggesting limited positive subjective sensory engagement at home. HRV analyses suggest non-linear and interactive associations between thermal conditions and RMSSD, moderated by humidity, CO₂, illuminance, and sound. BP showed no significant environmental associations. This study demonstrates the feasibility of integrating subjective diaries, multi-domain IEQ monitoring, and physiological measurements in real homes. Although exploratory due to its small sample and short duration, the work raises questions about sensory deprivation in WfH environments and highlights the need for larger studies exploring interventions that promote comfort and positive sensory experiences in remote work settings.