ZEMCH 2015 - International Conference Proceedings | Page 500
levels. Both the size of the extensions and the presence of changes to internal partitions were
strongly correlated to satisfaction with acoustic privacy levels, while the presence of self-built
external roofs was positively correlated to results on natural light perception. No statistically significant correlations were found between personalisation strategies and winter or summer temperatures, safety, ventilation, neither with visual privacy satisfaction levels. However, income decile was correlated to satisfaction levels with natural light (rs=-0.366, n=699, p=.002) and moisture
conditions (rs=-0.218, n=96, p=.002), while the users’ former residential situation was correlated to
satisfaction with summer temperatures (rs=-0.228, n=105, p=.019).
Table 6. Spearman’s Correlation results between satisfaction and personalisation variables
Independent Variable
Dependent Variable
Coef.
Sig.
n
n bedrooms
extension size
-0.783
<.001
16
lot size
extension size
+0.660
=.005
16
extension possibilities
extension size
+0.510
=.044
16
modification capabilities
kitchen partitions
+0.213
=.035
98
kitchen size
kitchen partitions
+0.249
=.012
101
finishing works
no modification
-0.449
<.001
94
bathroom location
extension size
-0.475
=.063
16
moisture levels
extension end use
-0.202
=.065
84
acoustic privacy
extension size
-0.703
=.002
16
-
change partitions
+0.200
=.044
102
natural light
external roofs
-0.389
<.001
109
After segmentation by dwelling type, developer, personalisation levels, and general demographic characteristics, Kuskal-Wallis H test evidenced that the largest number of significant differences
in satisfaction levels resulted from the two first grouping variables (Figure 6). As shown in Table 7, when dwelling type was used as segmenting variable, satisfaction ranks for dwelling size,
modification capabilities, kitchen size, bathroom location, moisture levels, visual privacy, safety,
and winter temperatures were significantly different. When segmented by developer, differences in satisfaction ranks for number of bedrooms, modification capabilities, bathroom location,
and acoustic privacy were also significant. In contrast, when these satisfaction levels were segmented by income decile, age of the oldest female and number of users, only satisfaction with
current number of bedrooms showed significant differences among groups (H=12.275, p<.001),
whilst when segmented by personalisation extent and workmanship quality only differences in
finishing works were significant (H=71.163, p<.001). Although no significant differences were found
in finishing works when segmented by developer or by dwelling type, the differences were significant when segmented by income decile (e.g. H=17.270, p=.008 for floors and H=13.001, p=.043 for
wall finishing works).
Interestingly, when expectation levels were segmented by developer, architectural quality expectations were significantly higher for the NGO group (H=42.516, p<.001) whilst no significant
differences were found in terms of environmental quality expectations. Nonetheless, when environmental quality expectations were used as segmenting variable, satisfaction levels with both
moisture (H=11.773, p=.003) and winter temperatures (H=8.958, p=.011) were significantly different,
whilst differences in satisfaction with kitchen sizes (H=12.750, p=.002) were only significant when
segmented by expected architectural quality.
498
ZEMCH 2015 | International Conference | Bari - Lecce, Italy