..-~v~II(' ' r

. . I II V'.‘ '55‘55‘5-

i§§fi$ Q 35353
mm”. 4K.“

. fit}. {50‘
W'I‘ .I.~.

  
  
  
  
  
  

 
   
 
  

.29.?5IIII-III .2 .5

  

       
 
 
  
 
   
 
    

575:.
:5 if g, 55555155555IA5‘X .‘l-

 

    

   

    
   

 
 

   

    

  
 
   
  

  

  
  
  

  
 

   

   

 
 
 
   
   

   
   

  
 
  

    
 
 
   
    
 
 

 
  

  
   
 
 

   
    
   

 
  
  

 

    

 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

. 2: 4.
I 5; 5 50““ {Isl-9‘55 IL .5TI 5555555
I.II. III I 5 53A _' "'5‘“! (5‘ M91551, .I.Iv 3325555 5&5":
I, 55. J ,aj-III .- V {' ”5,35 55545555555 Iec’ ;I5:51535\5 5\
. ,Il‘ “(I520 “553%,, .575 553555555; :5£fi5§051}‘555555 455551555
55575555 I I.” ' ‘. 6 ' x 551' 525% - .
. ... I 25%" K5555! E, . . . g III,,II.¢I_ ma“ .-
5,55,; 515.5 5§ 55 ‘555555y5glit‘5I15V‘K 5kg 523‘ M51" I555 555:5 “,I\L.)b5 5:?55555} 5 55.5555 m5 555‘ 555555
'II. ,I ! I-, 5,I5‘,5‘ I I . n. I ' ‘, .
,: .II II-‘JII, ‘4; .P [,,\5 5‘” ““V\‘5 F‘Tfif‘ “HI h,‘f&vigfih 5-\ . 35% I ‘\t‘t‘\ §E 281' ) I5} 5\‘\‘55\5 II-
'-I-II . 45555555555 ' I. ml. . , ~ "I55.
I: 554;, ' 3.24,; I115: 355%?“ N": I: '52:! “I -‘- 5'5
m, m: 5‘5 .2555 M 555: IR 4"‘55‘3? “ ‘I I '
IuIIv »-.'.-Ir2;~!4I ~.:>‘“I 55$ e 5 M» .tI2 WI-
“'55 '.I'I .5' 1'15'55’I5 .55» 'I 1-. 5555,51! 55 55555:": 5 55855 ’4" 55555 ‘I\ 'Il': 55515555
':"'I 15' 5I5y|5.5‘I5-5 I ,I: 'III‘.,~II5’II ., II ,II E”, 1,. I‘I' 5'5I55'55{\-;5 Jr‘k ,0} 5‘5‘5\‘ 39‘. A\.".’ (I:I5|
222.222: Izzy. :‘I'zu..".¢:5w§ -:.~I.I'.~JI,§I,aIz-.’I"£ ‘I 3,9215%. 35’1” :‘4- 245' '\‘-‘I VII“
2m.“ '?,-!:I.'I;I:‘-'II ‘L-z'i‘..-t'.-I I. 1 -' .;I'I~;- III'II -.'/"- III; '5‘ 5‘ {“-
' r. II5,5‘5 ~ 5; "Ana‘s“. 5|I5!*’5 '5 (‘55 5 ‘* .5515‘55'h‘f! I ’5510l 519% ' 55.. 55555
“I .III R." ~ I, #35055. I 5. 5,5“ 5.:5n5 555‘5‘155'L5 'I,:,II\‘I If .41, .Jb ‘I"‘I"~n ,
I, I, :III‘IIII IIIIIIIIII‘ III-.2222. ,,
5 .55 5,5955, .5555'5'5-55‘II5:IEII:5555555fgi55555hz'53'g5i'5‘ 5:955555555% “ta; §:'{55¥35\55\‘5?55.‘-5‘5I5§(« 51'55’5155‘ (I'.»"5'555'555 I .
:5'.'II'.‘I.54I.5'5I'3":QI'.‘5555555-535'5355'555155‘5 . III 52:2. . .2 I “(III-3'!- 232:3:1"
.5‘55-I5(J5 If" IIFIIfqt, fil§3fi§£jyln KN $115- ‘35 ‘ E-‘i 5:55? \‘i ‘i‘ R {95“}? '.
III .. .‘I \II 5“,! I' I I I 5
5 ‘55 555:55555“:‘5 5 I‘I,555 ‘ 55' ‘5' “555515' 5 *5 ‘ 55 5.55 %
'35? if E55555 5594Iff‘b 555“ IN“ 2.3 55555 5555‘.“ 5 55555515555 '5 '
,I I, 5II I ' In"? 5\ - 5v
.13 ~51] J‘I‘III:I,I:I:II555 ‘ v5 4w,“
..;. II}: ‘5. '5'51‘5'55335'555 5M a?“ MIN 5 5 452 154$ )0
1'? LI- I|.. IIIvm’ -'4 -"I.»'.I‘,;I' IN ”A”: 55> 5
..I5 ‘:555I5/'55.’1"vL:-55.I:\5W\ H ,J-l, I155 05,?“57555‘14‘ 5*,5 5’50 5555 5'555555'55 55555‘
IIIII-IIIIIIII ‘I55I‘E55I‘5I‘55f555555 5.‘ «IL, 2",“ 51/915551 551'? III5.5I‘:5' 5“," f?
.t ' -' '2-15I IIII 55,1 I'W'55 . -'¢‘5'
’5I'5I5551555I55'"555'5I555559t “55552555555555 , ' .
F .5 . 5-5I50’I555 $5, I . I ‘5
5.55 Iliz; 9' “In,“ "55M 5555" 55555555155552 5555555 55‘\.,5'5,III555II‘ I-hw
~ “I III 2.. .,.... I
III,III-III5,I “III '
I"; .- ;?I.-,.II3I.‘II:I§I‘: :5f’I’I

. 4 WI» J‘j’ I555"
II . 'JIII.II .5Iff5Ij55-t55q555I; \' I" (3,,th *5
.I I II,. III . .

      
   
    
   

 

 
      

 
     

      
 

    

  

 

II'I '. ’IcwI, I,” 3" .‘5 5 .
I5: 55 55 I55 ,5,5[iI555‘.’I5"‘,ty \I5I15 I Al I 5.5555 .55515‘5'5 55.. 5.5555}; 5555555555 5,55 -5 I 5 5 ‘
I. I, III ‘5'; III I. li'W; . .'I , 1) I
.555 . 5555,5551,” ‘I 55 .,II .5555- I I I. 5555515 55 ,5!I:l4 5555 .I.555 II .357 . ""5 {5345'
I5 55I5I- .5'I “‘5 5.5' I 5 '55,“ 5' 5.‘ I55'5 ,I‘,"5I 55. 5' {555:5‘5I55 -.5
:55 I' 5 5:, 55‘555‘ 5 ,5‘5 :55 5' 555555 I,:5,:.;, 575,65 .35] ..5 I‘,‘{é,'\5(55‘.555555£.:I‘,,‘I55I5,'55I5I5I 5555554552635.
.I . I ,I, IIjI : .,' II _ ‘ , I 153.5555 I: III :, III”, 5.55155 5.51.? 3:25,?” 5,}, Ii!t:5l“,,+'5|lf45\
'I ‘ 1“)" «In ." -.""4" '»:?.I \I. 'I ., ‘5' 2"” .-I..,;II.I,IILI_~,.¢:-
‘i .. .. .-. ‘-' f“ JiI'I'II‘ III I "III-w “I'!':I"iII-;""" I'.-. I'i’II'Ii"
5 5‘ 5 .2 5 I ' I"5 :5! ' ’(ITI 5&5 ' 5“ 5, .IIII, \5, 2155'. 5 5H3!“ :I‘IW: 5
'I I . 5.‘ 1‘ 55.55! 5555555 ,\ III 5I‘.',,I | I5555555‘ , |.I’I:_Ifi..v ‘. I, :(‘5 I
I I .’ I I ' 'I‘ ,.IIIIIl5II|[,‘, 5553155155055" I “(‘5 .I“ \55II‘5'5I\,5‘I}‘.I5~5
‘ ' ‘I ~ " I .w, I . II. -.a .., ' - . «ALI-I" -
| . 5 5 I5 '5 IYIJJ)‘ dt’], I 4|,” . ’b 55 I I 5,,4' 5! 55 55505 '
I , .5 I. ,l’, .55 I,’.,II‘I" 25555 IIV 9], , I ,‘l’
I f ‘ ' 5 ‘ 5" 5'55 iI- 5'5I’I5 5 ' '5 5 5 ’I.‘ - r ' I
I‘ III I I‘IIII, 555' II III: IIyI”, , I, . I Hi ’1‘, ,I‘ I'I . IJ5 ,I . I I-,I, H’,‘ 5’55 I l .
. I I I I '.,I .IIII ,I5 5H,:5155' , II 55I55 I I II ,,|,:I,.,,I II I, ' IIIIIII 5| II I‘, I ,' . '55‘1‘55 t, 55‘” 'iPI I II ‘I I'll "é ' fin“
." 5 .f‘ III'I‘I ', .I I 5 I', CI ,5' 55 I' ‘ 525 ‘5 I 5 .pI'
5 ‘ 5‘44 $555515 55 5555“,, ' ,II,. I I,II ({255I1'555‘ 1,. 'i,, ’, I; {WM} “45% {1| ,5551I .' ‘5mmd‘ .I-er W51“
. I 5 ,‘. 5". ','I. 5 II II'. II” '5‘55'l55‘5‘l155505555553555?” ‘II,5]I'5I5“ "5 . .J.‘ 55:3 59 5 ‘*.II_:1\55I' ”51.5.3: '7
I I .‘ll\ .t’I ’I.‘ ,-‘~',-« ”qu1“ I 14,55.” }5515-5 “5,5555525‘5 {1'5'5' l ‘5'”) .55 ‘(5 .\55 I?“ m '.‘.":A55'55' 5*
. . ~ ml: '. M. .vi'r 2,3 ’,3 'I,’..‘ - ?i,.IIj_'I '15 153,131,441“ ,‘q. 5'] Y5 55:.I ‘7, III' {5' ,if’I'7-5'E'7I3?“I6
l 5 ‘ l ‘I 5! 'II5 "I! II I,‘ ll: '54555 '5.5 I5555 “5 5555. . III 5:55:5[5 I' (I, 5 f“ ‘- 5‘55“} “555515-55 5:55“
. s . 1 .. I -§«.-III' I: .. 'I‘ . I.-- ..,. IIIIII- III fI
'5 5‘ 5 5( 5 5 I. 5 I" ‘5 5 5‘ 5I5'5-55 (5 '5; 355' II, 5.5-5.5 I55; 5 511555555 5'5 5’551’5, 555 555525555 55555555555555 55555555155555 k 5 5:552 5 555.’ '55'75555 .5355
5 5 II 5‘055‘5 5 5 51505 l5 I ’555"
l I'. .I . 5 ":12". I15I ‘3' 1" ' ,I5'I.5 5‘5 '5 #5595,552451.535; 5 5
i. I. , 5. I, ‘I ,I IIIIMI ‘| If, I II,5 5,5 II”, ”M III‘ , I .. 55* ..- .
l, - . . I. 4‘; ,gI. .
.'I 5 5:! ‘
I I

 

   
 

.2 5. I 55555.5
$~fl
L. I1

II I
III II55'I,I ‘7' 5,5,15|\,\(5I5 'II,,(I,I
. .. . ,. w 2% III
I.~..-,. NHL

[It—4,1
--_

 

   

l‘l‘m5 555 q b'55.5—
. "'If-I Ta III5II'5.V!5E 4W"
‘5 ‘ ‘7 '1: I. .‘II In,“ 5:..I.‘I~"'I.15I'5I‘I5.==5 555421: fix “I 55% ‘53 I2? I
‘. . ,I I I . I 55'55555 {.IIII” .I )I,.I,.‘.I 2555:: III, 55,5,5‘1QIQZIL5I545H-IIV5555MI55 ;
. 4 I III I. .L “i,” II,‘ .35.,’¢r:5_:;5:5 II '.‘.. I‘_5 I, :‘552- .._I.:- .-I
r 55595 5’ :.5: 5', 5.5.. ‘ I555 555.. .‘El' “55.535515515555‘ “‘Muu-u a“ (5

 

llllllllllllllllllwillwill _

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
Adoption of Energy Efficient Design
by Michigan Chapter of American Society
of Interior Designers

presented by

Denise Miller Guerin

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

Master of Arts degree in Human Environment
and Design

5‘

/{§fl7171((}fl 7/1'I/l/l4g/V

Major professor

Date €//&//7Y

0-7 639

 

I _
1;.)- W

1:35" 54? 5100?“

v
I

 

 

ADOPTION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT DESIGN
BY MICHIGAN CHAPTER OF AMERICAN

SOCIETY OF INTERIOR DESIGNERS

By

Denise A. Guerin

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Human Environment and Design

1978

ABSTRACT

This research tested Everett Rogers' adoption of innovation
process for individual decision making. Rogers' theory
specifies four stages in the course of adopting an innova—
tion. These four stages, (1) awareness, (2) interest, (3)
evaluation, and (4) adoption were used as the dependent
variables of the experimental design. The sample was
divided into two groups, the control group and the experi-
mental group, and were used in addition to demographic
variables as the independent variables. The sample tested
was the membership of the Michigan Chapter of American
Society of Interior Designers. The quasi-experimental
research followed a nonerandomized control group, pretest-

posttest design.

Of the four null hypotheses stated (testing for a difference
in means between the control group and experimental group),
the awareness, evaluation and adoption hypotheses were not
rejcted, whereas the interest hypothesis was rejected.
Therefore, Rogers' theory was not supported as articulated
but indicated some support for Rogers' restated theory of

the four stages occurring simultaneously.

This research gave more support to the interior designer's
willingness to adopt the innovation than to the actual

implementation and adoption of the innovation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My appreciation and thanks go to members of my graduate
committee, D. Kent Sissel and Richard Graham, for their

professional remarks and personal concern.

My appreciation and thanks go to Dr. Barbara Stowe and
Dr. Gertrude Nygren for stimulating ideas which integrated

various Human Ecology aspects.

My appreciation and thanks go to Susan Reedy and Martha
Shinn for many moments of joy, much encouragement, and

for letting me invade their territory.

To Dr. Bonnie M. Morrison, my thesis advisor and friend,
my thanks for providing an underpinning in creative
research, a "renewable" interest in energy, and her
continual support for an uncompromising research exper-

ience.

ii

To my parents and parents-in-law, my deepest thanks for
their participation in my life, above and beyond the call

of duty.

To my friends, Barb, Eunie, Fluff, Laura, Louie and Pam,

my love for always listening and never asking "Why?"

To Amy, Nora and Jay, my children, my love to them for

understanding beyond their years.

To Patrick, my husband and endless supporter, my love and

thanks for life, love and laughter.

iii

‘
'4’.
I‘
D
1. *
..
i 'l.’
3' \
’ -
u . a
t.
.
o
. b
l r ‘
t L.
J ., Y ,
v, l _
fl ll m. ,r u
, I . .
v N \V o
I
J
\u
. .
A
a ‘rl’.
. -- \
ll
I o \
l» t s \
A l ll s!
I
f \
‘
I'll-I '
'l .I
J. . . . .
5
. u!
H . l
‘ F.’
b
I V
v u . 5
.fl 1!
{I I. A
"I If
. n l
\.
r . - l.
l I 1131
a I \ .
”till. .I

. I}. .v
u
. / u. .
v. x \.
\ I: n u dd
. \
\' .
cl . #3
li‘) ' h I
I I
l A l ’ Y
.. m n A
f \l J
, W! I .l .
A J .l. r. i I
r . . . I. l
, - O . v
. p l . l: n f
l I a
V» ‘(ll‘ 1" I. A d

‘ "-l

x,
V. f
-\ . a t I
n ..
. I v
/ t, o
I!» c. i \
H .
.H m"
b
.
I \
off,
5
Av
a u’.
‘ 1
.. ,o
. ’
ll... .1
ft. ..
.
; A. r
a F
.
(i
q . S
.1! l.
\ . ‘
(c I
,l’.
f..."
. ‘
~ In!
.
(l! .
.0.
r . iii r t
\r
\ A l
.1 \Il I. K!
_ .rr
\- . .v \i\
.If -
\.
K \ h r
‘ ‘~ I
\z. all. t I,

/
\

TABLE OF CONTENTS

iv

Page
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF APPENDICES Vii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Justification 2—3
Theory of Adoption of Innovation 3-6
Operationalized Variables 7-8
Dependent Variables 7-8
Statement of Research Problem 8-9
Discursive Definitions lO-ll
Hypotheses 12
Objectives 13
Assumptions 14
REVIEW OF LITERATURE 15
Diffusion of Innovation 16-25
Energy Conservation Adoption 26—27
METHODOLOGY 28
Survey Research Method 29
Procedure 29-31
Sampled Population 31
Selection of the Sample 32-36
Collection of the Data 36-37
Processing the Data 37
Analysis of the Data 37
Operational Definitions 38
Dependent Variables 38
Independent Variables 38
Statistical Analysis 39-42
ANALYSIS OF DATA 43
Findings and Discussion 44
Hypothesis I 45-46
Hypothesis II 46-47
Hypothesis III 47-49
Hypothesis IV 50-51

 

r\ (J fx/ I . s" '
Irv .< l "
J/ ,- ~ ‘ '
f/ -" l
a! I ‘
4' , I
‘ l ‘ r - ’ ' vo-
f‘ a d t' |‘ \K
¢ I. \- e" ‘3 ‘ A ‘3‘ ~— .
/_ 'r ' "I ‘ ' ' f.
.a . '7
t
I r
«.1’ * I
s ‘1'
M. _ ’ '
I ‘l
’1
3
.r' . K ‘
.r}:
i r‘ ‘ ' .-
\ ‘J
in t “ "' ‘/
t ’ .- ,.,‘sa..-;sa.<llf "M .Oo' ‘i
v. (.1 P
‘ v
,,7-/l’ r- v
/
"2 f a '
- / tr '. n' ‘ ~
’ _ O“
fl ' j 1“ ‘ ‘ M V
o {J I! V
A
A .’ ' l: A
J I ‘ '3 I \ s
‘, l . r " I
I
...... m... ” ‘.. ---... .- .--. _ - v . 1.- ‘r....,‘u v
n -. 1
)“‘D..'.‘t '0..I\
l * I ' '“
I
I
I] A '2. .‘ 4 .l 1“,
‘ l
fi
l_' '\ O r: J ' .. , “J ~ ‘ ’ I ' ’
c! .. -. I ‘ '
I 1
‘ 1 a f " i".
, m. bur-r
I l .
t
l. I 5 : I ‘ ' i V,“ i‘ 4
r arr" 9
0.1 (N! ix“ M
c
‘ I- I o I < -‘ ’
. ". I -
r I
L- "
i v . j g .- ‘1‘ ' f t I
.5
\‘r‘mf' ,‘ )
o I
l “5
\l‘ ’5 ‘ I ’2 " ‘ ‘
,I

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
Overview
Conclusions
Limitations
Implications

APPENDICES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

IMPLICATIONS

Page

52
53-54
55-61
62-63
64-66

67-78

79-84

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

LIST OF TABLES

Description of the Sample

Membership Status

Age

Sex

Highest Educational Level

Income—Annual

Frequency of

Frequency
Frequency

Frequency

of

of

of

Response
Response
Response

Response

for

for

for

for

Variable Awareness
Variable Interest
Variable Evaluation

Variable Adoption

T—Test Results for Variable Awareness

T—Test Results for Variable Interest

T-Test Results for Variable Evaluation

T-Test Results for Variable Adoption

Page
33
34
34
35
35
36
40
4O
41
42
45
46
48

50

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

A Letter of Introduction 69
Pretest Questionnaire . 70-72

B Letter of Introduction 74
Posttest Questionnaire 75-77

Follow-up Letter 78

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

JUSTIFICATION

 

With the advent of the 'energy crisis' (Arab oil embargo,
October 1973), government officials, scientists, and re-
searchers have been concerned with how to reduce energy
consumption, particularly of petroleum fossil fuels.
Numerous technical devices and adaptations in buildings
and equipment, as well as behavioral changes, have been
identified as methods to reduce energy use. Education

in energy conserving techniques has been urged on all
consumers; residential, commercial, and industrial. Many
Studies have been done to evaluate energy conservation.

To date, no empirical data has been obtained to evaluate
the knowledge in and the use of energy conserving design
techniques by the interior designer. Is it not timely and
appropriate for the design professionals, those who create
the buildings and interiors, to affirm their concern and
status in developing energy conserving design? Interior
designers have always been innovators of aesthetic as well
as functional solutions for interior environmental problems.
As creative professionals, designers have a new responsi-
bility; to consider energy as a new element in design, equal
to the traditional elements of space, form, shape, line,

texture and color.

Richard G. Stein, author of Architecture and Energy, sum-

 

marizes the strategy of implementing rational energy con-

serving design on a self-determining basis.

"The cost of not doing it (conserving energy
through rational design) is so huge and so
tragic that in one way or another these changes
will have to come about. If they come as the
result of governmental decrees or of the impos-
ition of controls under stringent police direc-
tion, the outcome may be an anticipated reduc-
tion in the use of the earth's resources, but
the quality and content of life might be dimin-
ished irretrievably. And yet, if these changes
are embraced and adopted as the correction of
the suicidal course we embarked upon a couple
of decades back, it could reintroduce a dimen-
sion to life that is rapidly being eliminated.
The basis for optimism is rooted in the con-
viction that design is the act of intelligence
applied to the allocation of existing resources.
(STEIN, 1977)

THEORY OF ADOPTION OF INNOVATION

 

Effective communication is essential in a program as far
reaching as the diffusion of energy conserving design
techniques. Since the topic being research here intro-
duces a new idea about design to a specific social system,
interior designers, it is necessary to explore a particular

type of communication, the diffusion of innovation.

The whole realm of research and development in the diffu-
sion of innovation, is a crtiical one when considering the
future role of the professional design organization in our

society. John Gardner (1965) in his book Self Renewal,

 

suggests that constant innovation is necessary if organiza—

tions are to survive. This same problem is discussed when

Alvin Toffler (1970) in Future Shock, relates his concerns

 

about social systems and social system members being unable
to adapt to the rapidly changing world around them. His
suggestions of flexibility and ability to adapt new ideas
to environmental problems provide significance for research

into the innovation processes in a social system.

Diffusion of innovation is a current and useful means of
studying the introduction of new ideas and methods in par-
ticularized social systems. It is thought that through the
introduction of new ideas and practices a social system can
effectively be changed or improved. Research efforts in
diffusion processes are abundant in quantity and diversified
in areas of emphasis. These will be discussed in the review

of literature chapter.

The particular theory to be used in this research evaluating
the interior designer's individual decision-making process
is Everett Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory. He de-
fines an innovation as "an idea, practice, or object per—
ceived as new by an individual" (Rogers, 1962). ’This idea
does not necessarily have to be brand new, it may have been
around for some time, but the individual receiver has not
yet made a decision concerning its adoption or rejection.
The purpose of introducing an innovation is to explore the
change that takes place among members of a social system
during the period of diffusion of the innovation. The spe-
cific innovation this research examined was energy conserv-
ing solar energy design techniques. The cooperation of the
Michigan Chapter of the Amercian Society of Interior Design-

ers, (hereafter MASID) an organization of professional in-

terior designers, was sought and granted for the introduc-
tion of the innovation conceived and made explicit by this
research. The receivers of the innovation were the member-

ship of the MASID.

Many researchers (Bell—1962, King-1964, Simpson—1959) have
indicated that the theory underlying the diffusion process
is a valid method of communicating new ideas to members of
an organization. Indeed, Rogers defines diffusion as "the
process by which new ideas are communicated to the members
of a social system" (Rogers, 1962). The basic elements of
the diffusion of new ideas are given by Rogers as follows:
(1) the innovation, (2) which is communicated through

certain channels, (3) over time, (4) among members of a

social system.

Each of these elements in the diffusion process has basic
characteristics that define each area more precisely. The

innovation has already been defined as a new idea. The next

 

element, communication of the innovation through certain

 

channels, was implemented through an oral presentation of
the innovation to members of the receiver group. The pre-
sentation of the innovation necessarily must take place
between a source and receiver group similar in character-
istics. For this particular research problem, the source
was a practicing professional interior designer, and the
receiver group was the organization of professional interior
designers, MASID. Thus the source and the receiver have

similar professional underpinnings, status, and attributes.

The third element in the diffusion process is the factor
of time. Time is an important consideration in the
diffusion process and involves the introduction of the
innovation-decision process. The time element as it was
used in the study will be examined in detail later. The
fourth and final element in the diffusion process is the

‘notion of the innovation occuring among members of a social

 

system. Rogers defines a social system as "a collectivity
of units which are functionally differentiated and engaged
in joint problem solving with respect to a common goal"
(Rogers, 1962). The receiver group, MASID, functioned as

the social system within the analysis.

As previously stated, the third element, time, includes the
innovation-decision process. The introduction of the
innovation-decision process gives the four variables to be
analyzed in this research. The innovation-decision process
is the mental process through which an individual passes
from first knowledge of an innovation to a decision to adopt
or reject, and to confirmation of this decision. This process
should be distinguished from the diffusion process. The
major difference between the two processes is that diffusion
occurs among the units in a social system, whereas innova-
tion-decision making takes place within the mind of an indi-
vidual. Examined within this framework are the four stages
of Rogers' innovation-decision process, (1) awareness, (2)
interest, (3) evaluation, and (4) adoption. Rogers' model
of the innovation-decision process actually includes a

fifth step, trial, between evaluation and adoption. For the
purposes of this study, trial has been eliminated, as Rogers
does in a later revision of his theory. The primary reason
for eliminating trial in this study was because of the

relative short time the research spanned.

OPERATIONALIZED VARIABLES

 

The four stages, awareness, interest, evaluation, and
adoption, become the dependent variables of the study
and will be defined as stages of the decision-making
process interior designers go through in the adoption of
innovative energy efficient interior design techniques.
These are defined as follows:

1. Awareness: the individual learns of the existence

 

of the new idea but lacks information about it. The

point where one gains information and becomes aware of
needs. The professional interior designer is hypothesized
to become aware of the energy problem and its importance
for the designed environment through: (1) awareness of
the energy problem, and (2) belief in the energy crisis.
These were the two items used to measure awareness.

2. Interest: the individual develops interest in the
innovation and seeks additional information about it. The
professional interior designer is hypothesized to become
interested in energy conserving design elements through
two items which measure the following: (1) interest in
providing a solution, and (2) a sense of responsibility
to make environments energy efficient.

3. Evaluation: the individual makes mental application of

 

the new ideas to the present and anticipated future situation
and decides whether or not to try it. The professional
interior designer is hypothesized to evaluate alternative
solutions available to design energy conserving solar int—
eriors and decides to try or reject them. This is measured
by the following items: (1) evaluation of the innovation,
(2) knowledge of energy efficiency, and (3) knowledge of

energy conserving solar design.

4. Adoption: the individual uses the new ideas continu-
ously on a full scale. The interior designer is hypothe-
sized to adopt the new design ethic of energy efficiency
and is measured by these items: (1) adoption of innova-
tion, and (2) willingness to adopt energy efficiency as

a design ethic.

The end product is to achieve the adoption of the innova-
tion through an individual, decision-making process, through
an organized, step-by-step procedure that can be measured

and evaluated at each stage.

Using Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory as a basis for
empirical research on an interior design professional organ-
ization as an innovative social system, allows the gathering
of evidence_as to a system's capacity to change and improve.
The problem of this research study thus becomes acquiring
empirical evidence to support the theoretical structure

for the process of individual decision making as put forth
by Everett Rogers in the adoption of innovation through the

diffusion of innovation.

STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

 

The study is designed to indicate the extent to which the
diffusion of an idea about energy conserving solar design
occured amongst a social system (MASID), and further, to
indicate what extent that idea has become a part of the
individual member's detision-making process toward the

adoption and implementation of energy efficient design.

As a result of this problem, two specific concerns were
examined: (1) the evaluation of the interior designer's
knowledge of energy efficient, specifically solar design,
techniques, and (2) the evaluation of the interior de—
signer's stated support to adopt energy efficient design

as a new design ethic.

DISCURSIVE DEFINITIONS:

 

Alternative Energy Sources: renewable energy sources, not
petroleum based; wind, hydro, solar nuclear, geo-thermal,

etc.

Conduction: heat transfer directly through a material

 

Convection: heat transfer created by the motion of air or
water resulting from a difference in temperature and the

action of gravity

Design Ethic: a standard of conduct by which a professional

interior designer governs his/her practice

)-

Energy: a measure of the ability or power to do work
Energy Efficient Desigg: using various techniques and
methods to design a building to reduce the mechanical

energy load for heating and cooling

Fossil Fuels: non-renewable energy sources, the most

frequently used are coal, oil and natural gas

Interior Environment: the living/working space within an

enclosure

Mechanical Solar Energy: a solar system requiring pumps

or fans to move fluids, an active system

10

ll

Passive Solar System: a solar system using direct sunlight

 

for an energy source, maximizing orientation, siting, archi-

tectural features, window treatments and materials

Professional Interior Designer: one who is qualified by

 

education and experience to identify, research and creatively
solve problems relative to the function and quality of man's

proximate environment

HYPOTHESES:

Sub H 3:
0

There is no difference between
control group and experimental

of the energy problem.

There is no difference between
control group and experimental

in providing a solution to the

There is no difference between
control group and experimental

of the innovation.

the means of the

group in awareness

the means of the
group in interest

energy problem.

the means of the

group in evaluation

There is no difference between the means

in evaluation of the innovation between

education levels of the

the treatment group.
There is no difference between

control group and experimental

of the innovation.

12

control group and

the means of the

group in adoption

OBJECTIVES:

 

1. To test the viability of Rogers' adoption of innovation

theory in relation to energy and design.

2. To test a difference between the control group and
treatment group in relation to awareness, interest, eval-

uation and adoption.

SPECIFICALLY:

 

3. To test the professional interior designer's awareness

 

of the energy problem.
4. To test the professional interior designer's interest
in providing a solution to the energy problem by learning

more about energy efficient design techniques.

5. To test the professional interior designer's evaluation

of energy efficient and solar design.

6. To test the professional interior designer's willingness

 

to adopt energy efficient design techniques.

13

ASSUMPTIONS:

 

1. The professional interior designer's role is that of an
innovator of traditional design contepts, and therefore is
assumed to be innovative in new concepts (energy efficiency

concepts).

2. The interior designer answered the questionnaire on
energy and design truthfully and to the best of his/her
ability.

3. The mailed questionnaire is a valid method of obtaining
information from a sample of respondents in an experimental
design.

4. The adoption of the innovation is by definition desirable.

5. The American Society of Interior Designers is a social

system as defined in Rogers' model.

14

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

15

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION

 

The topic of this research involves the communication of a
new idea to members of a social system. The specific form

of communication examined is the diffusion of innovation
process. Katz, et a1. (1963) define diffusion as acceptance,
over time, of some specific idea or practice by an individual,
linked by specific channels of communication to a social
structure, and to a given system of values or culture.

Rogers states that diffusion is a special type of commun-
ication by which innovations (ideas perceived as new) are
spread to the members of the social system. Diffusion in-
cludes the basic components of the communication process,
plus focusing on the entire process from the first knowledge
of the new idea to the actual behavior change accompanying

an adaptation of the new idea (Rogers, 1971).

Diffusion has been studies in various kinds of research
traditions. Although the theoretical explanation is based
on a common process, the topics are different as are the

specific variables.

The rural sociological approach to studying diffusion of
agricultural innovations is best represented by the Ryan
and Gross study (1943) of hybrid seed corn. Lionberger's
study (1949) of informal communication patterns in communi-
ties, Wilkening's studies (1949) of social psychological

variables, and Colemen's study (1946) of sociometric data

16

17

on soil conservation all support Rogers' innovation theory.
They also provided the fundamental data for the significant
summarizing document on diffusion of innovation by Rogers

(1962).

The major contribution to the studying of educational
innovations has come from the Columbia University Teacher's
College since the late 1920's. The effort was originally
guided by Mort and best summarized by Ross (1958). Adapt-
ability of schools to new practices is the central theme

in most of the studies. Other efforts include R. Carlson's
study (1965) of adoption of educational innovations and

J. Coleman's study (1961) of school climates.

The diffusion of medical drugs was first studied by Caplow
(1954). A series of systematic investigations in drug use
was made by the Columbia University's Bureau of Applied
Social Research under the leadership of Katz, Menzel and

J. Coleman (1954).

The communication approach to the study of news diffusion
and dissemination problems includes research by Deutschmann
and Danielson (1960) of four major news events. Deutschmann
and Borda (1962) researched adoption patterns in a village
of a developing country. Further communication research

was the study of diffusion of news of the Kennedy assass-

ination (Greenberg and Parker, 1964).

l8

Dissemination of scientific information is another approach
to studying innovation diffusion. Centers to study the
optimal process of dissemination of scientific information
to practitioners and fellow scientists have been established
at the University of the State of New York (Center on
Innovation in Education), University of Michigan (Center

for Research on the Utilization of Scientific Knowledge),
and Stanford University (Institute for Communication

Research), among other academic institutions.

The spatial diffusion study is an approach first taken by
Hagerstrand (1952, 1960) to study population immigration

and spread of agricultural products in Sweden. This approach
has become closely associated with machine simulation of
innovation diffusion through the works of Karlson (1958),
Pitts (1962), and Deutschmann (1962).

A unifying effort to summarize and conceptualize the findings
in the diversified areas of subject matters of diffusion was

made by Rogers (1962), Stanford University. It is, to date,

the best documentation of empirical evidence of diffusion

research.

From the above evidence, it can be seen that the diffusion
of innovation theory should be an appropriate theoretical
framework for investigating the communication of energy
efficient design techniques. Four basis elements are
essential parts of the diffusion of new ideas and practices.
These elements are: (1) the innovation, (2) communicated
through channels, (3) over time, and (4) to members of a

social system (Rogers, 1976). Each of these elements have

19

been discussed theoretically in Chapter 1. Their relation—
ship to the adoption of innovation energy conserving solar

energy design will now be examined.

1. THE INNOVATION

 

Energy conserving passive solar design techniques will be
introduced as the innovation to the members of a social

system.

There is some disagreement among researchers as to whether
knowledge or perceived need comes first. Tarde (Rogers,
1971) says "Since the desire for, cannot precede the

notion of, an object, no desire can be prior to the inven-
tion." Taking this one step further, one could postulate
that a person becomes aware of an innovation quite by acci—
dent, as one cannot actively seek out an idea not known to
them. Hassinger (1959) takes the opposite view in that he
feels knowledge seeking is initiated by the individual. It
is an active process. Due to the selective exposure ten-
dencies in people, they will, consciously or unconsciously,
expose themselves to those ideas in accord with their needs,
interests or existing attitudes. They will seldom expose
themselves to a message unless they have first felt a need
for the innovation. He proposes that unless the person has
a felt need and perceives the innovation as relative to this
need, he will not attend to it and it will be of little
effect. Rogers summarizes these viewpoints as, "The need
for innovations such as a pesticide to treat a new crop

pest, proably comes first. But for other new ideas the

innovation may create the need (Rogers, 1962)." Needs in

20

this framework concern reduction of energy consumption in
buildings. These can either be felt first, causing designers
to seek knowledge; or can be aroused by general knowledge

of the new idea being present in the culture.

2. COMMUNICATED THROUGH CHANNELS

 

This is the point where the research on the effectiveness of
different levels and types of information, feedback and
methods of presentation becomes important. Existing know-
ledge of the effectiveness of mass media channels versus
interpersonal channels is important in understanding how

information becomes communicated.

It has been found that communication flows in organizations
are usually horizontal, that is, between individuals of
equal status (Simpson, 1959). One of the fundamental prin-
ciples of human communication is that the exchange of mess-
ages most frequently occur between a source and a receiver
who are alike, or homophilous (Rogers, 1973). Homophily

is defined as the degree to which a source-receiver pair is
similar in certain attributes, like beliefs, education and
social status. Heterophily is the exact opposite. One of
the distinctive problems in communication is that the source
is usually quite heterophilous to the receiver. They simply
do not talk the same language. However, when source and
receiver are identical regarding their technical grasp of
the innovation, no diffusion can occur. Therefore, the

very nature of diffusion demands that at least some degree

of heterophily be present between source and receiver.

21

There is research evidence that the most effective change
agents are those who are most like their average client
on all variables except for technical compentence about
the innovation (Rogers, 1973). For maximum communication
effectiveness, a source and a receiver should be homo-
philous on certain variables and heterophilous on some
variables relevant to the innovation. One reason given
by Berscheik (1966) and Brock (1965) for the greater com-
munication effectiveness of homophilous sources is that
such homophily leads to greater credibility (the degree
to which a source is perceived as trustworthy and competent).
The greater the credibility of the source, the greater is
the confidence of the receiver in the apparent need of the

innovation.

Fear appeals, similar in nature to ones used for changing
health behaviors might be of some use. Haas, Bagley and
Rogers (1975) studied the differences in attitudes to change
energy behavior among people reading fear based information
about energy supply. They found stronger intentions to
change behavior among those who had read the fear appeal.
Education is based on the idea that change in intention

and attitudes will result in a similar change in behavior

(Bennett and Kassarjian, 1972).

3. OVER TIME

 

Time is one of the most important considerations in the
process of diffusion.‘ The time dimension is involved in
(1) the innovation-decision process by which an individual
passes from first knowledge of the innovation through its

adoption or rejection, (2) the innovativeness of the indi-

22

vidual, that is, the relative earliness-lateness with which
an individual adopts an innovation when compared to other
members of his social system, and (3) in the innovation's
rate of adoption, the relative speed with which an innova-

tion is adopted by the members of a social system.

1. Innovation-Decision Process

The innovation-decision process is described as a mental
process moving through a number of steps. It is important
to note that this is mental, and therefore not easy to -
observe or even to be sure of an individual's place in the

process.

Rogers (1962) gives the sequence in the innovation—decision
process as :

Awareness——-————— Interest-——-———— Evaluation———————— Adoption.
As stated earlier, these four steps will become the dependent

variables of this research.

2. Innovativeness of the Individual/Adopter Categories
Innovativeness is the degree to which an individual is
relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other members
of his system. Adopter categories are the classifications
of the members of a social system on the basis of innova-
tiveness. The five adopter categories are: (l) innovator,
(2) early adopter, (3) early majority, (4) late majority,
and (5) laggards.

23

A continuum of individual innovativeness is divided into

the five categories and appears thus: (Rogers, 1971, pg. 182)

Adopter Categorization on the Basis of Innovativeness

 

I
I
I I

I l l

I Early | Late 1

Innovators ' Majority | Majority |

I Adopters |
25% I 13.5% . 34% I 34% l Laggards
16%

Generalizations about the categories are stated, based on
observations abstracted from various studies. Using Rogers'
generalizations, dominant values are given as: innovators-
venturesome; early adopters-respectable; early majority-
deliberate; late majority—skeptical; and laggards-traditional.
The measure of innovativeness and the classification of the
system's members into adopter categories are based upon the

relative time at which an innovation is adopted.

3. Rate of Adoption
Rate of adoption is measured for an innovation or a system,
rather than for an individual. Five characteristics of an

innovation or new practice have been identified as explain-

24

ing the rate of adoption. (Rogers, 1971)

(1) Relative Advantage is the degree to which an innovation

 

is perceived to be better than the old. When this is seen
as positive, adoption is more likely to occur. Energy
efficiency's increased advantage was reinforced through
the energy crisis situation.

(2) Compatibility is the degree to which an innovation is

 

perceived as consistent with the existing values, past
experiences and needs of the receivers. This insures
greater safety with less risk to the receivers. It is

also the basis for one small change in actions paving the
way for another and possibly a larger change. If the

small change is tried and fails then a reverse direction
towards nonadoption can be the result. Behavioral changes,
related to changes in life-style and quality of life, might
be more difficult to encourage people to adopt. More suc-
cessful diffusion might occur with structural or built-in
energy saving devices that would not conflict too much with
existing values and life-style.

(3) Complexity refers to the ease or difficulty of under-

 

standing and use with which the idea is perceived. A
higher rate of adoption could result from simplifying the
energy efficiency techniques to one or two practices, such
as energy efficient window treatments, use of passive
solar energy, etc.

(A) Trialibility is the degree to which an innovation may

 

be experimented with on a limited basis. This could include
both a trial of actions and a psychological trial. This
cuts down the risk by allowing one to proceed in small,
successful increments toward the full adoption. Trial and
positive results of energy conserving techniques would
encourage people to continue to try more practices or adopt

them permanently.

25

(5) Observability is the degree to which the results of an

 

innovation are visible to others. The more easily observed
successes of the new idea, the more readily others are

adopted. Publicity of successful reduction of energy con-
sumption could be used to improve the visability of build-

ings meeting a certain standard of energy efficiency.

Rogers (1971) cites research proving that over time the
adoption of an innovation will increase. As more and more
people adopt, the diffusion effect, which is an increasing
degree of influence upon the individual to adept, comes
into play. As more people adopt, the rate of adoption of

the social system increases.

4. MEMBERS QE A SOCIAL SYSTEM

 

The last element, social system members, focuses on the
idea that each individual who should adopt an innovation

is greatly influenced by his social peer group. An impor-
tant factor affecting the adoption of any innovation is its
compatibility with the cultural beliefs of the social sys—
tem. If social norms do not support or approve the new
practice, it will be a long and difficult process to change
behaviors. The majority of people will only continue behav-
iors which are reinforced or rewarded by social norms and
customs. The difficulty in energy conservation lies in
identifying the complex factors that reward energy consump-
tive behaviors and those that reward energy conservation

behaviors. (Hannold and Nelson, 1976)

26

ENERGY CONSERVATION ADOPTION

 

Studied generally, energy conservation practices have been
the topics of several pieces of research. Diffusion of
energy information research has focused on how to educate
and motivate American consumers to adopt energy saving
behavior. Several research surveys have asked people across
the country what energy saving responses they have made to
the energy problem. In a national survey taken in March,
1974, Talarzyk and Omura reported that over 50 of the
sample said they made the same number of shopping trips

and drove the same number of miles as before the energy
crisis. Bartell (1974) found that seventy percent of a

Los Angeles County sample cut down on recreational auto-
mobile driving and forty percent skipped vacation trips.
Ninety-three percent reported that they tried to turn off
lights when not needed. In a study in the Lansing, Mich—
igan area, Morrison, Keith and Zuiches (1976) reported

that sixty-five percent of their sample stated that they
kept their thermostat at 68 degrees or less in the winter,
ninety-six percent reported turning off lights when not in
use, and eighty-five percent covered or sealed windows and
doors with storm windows or plastic. Perlman and Warren
(1975) conducted a survey in Hartford, Connecticut; Mobile,
Alabama; and Salem, Oregon. SiXty-seven percent of the
sample reported that they reduced driving for shopping and
recreational purposes and forty-three percent of the house—

holds closed off rooms to conserve heat.

Recent experimental research studies have attempted to test
various educational campaigns which might successfully reduce

energy consumption in households. One of the first studies

27

was conducted by Thomas Heberlein (1975) in Madison,
Wisconsin in March and April, 1973. In 1974, Kohlenberg,
Philips and Proctor (1976) studies the use of incentives
and information feedback to reduce electrical use during
peak hours. Studies by Hayes, Cone and Palmer, Lloyd and
Lloyd (1975) indicate that people will reduce electricity
consumption by as much as eighteen percent receiving feed-
back that tells them how much energy they are using and
how much it would cost if they continue to use it at the
same rate. Winett and Nietzel (1975) compared the use of
information and monetary incentives for reducing energy
consumption in 31 volunteer households. And finally, in

a study by Seaver and Patterson (1976), they presented
feedback to a group of homeowners that expressed the amount
of fuel oil that their homes consumed relative to the same

time period the year before.

Given findings such as these, further investigation into
the relationship of diffusion of energy efficiency infor-
mation and the adoption of an energy innovation, seems

necessary.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLGY

28

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY

SURVEY RESEARCH METHOD

 

"Survey research utilizes a variety of instruments and
methods to study relationships, effects of treatments,
longitudinal changes, and comparisons between groups",
(Isaac and Michael, 1971). That information is then
used to describe systematically the facts and charac-
teristics of a given population or area of interest,
to collect detailed factual information that describes
an existing phenomena, to identify a problem area and
to make comparisons and evaluation between two or more
variables. The survey or questionnaire method was used
in this research in order to obtain consistency and

quantifiable information.

A self-administered mailed questionnaire was designed to
elicit information from the basic unit of study, the
interior designer, MASID member. The use of a self-
administered mailed questionnaire is an efficient way to
collect data on a large number of variables as the subject
can respond more freely and openly as to the extent of
her/his knowledge of the problem area than in an interview

situation.

PROCEDURE

 

This research focuses on the collection and analysis of

empirical data in order to obtain information to assist in

29

30

identifying a specific problem area; knowledge of and the
effects of the energy problem on the practices of the pro-

fessional interior designer.

The research procedure is based on a quasi-experimental
design with descriptive underpinnings. It is defined as
quasi-experimental because it lacks one characteristic of

a true experimental design; a completely randomized sample.

The reasons for this will be discussed later.

This quasi-experimental research follows a non-randomized
control-group, pretest-posttest design, set up in the

pattern shown below.

 

 

 

PRETEST TREATMENT POSTTEST
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP Q1 X Q2
CONTROL GROUP Q1 Q2
POSTTEST ONLY Q2

 

This design investigates the possible cause and effect rela—
tionships by exposing one experimental group to one treat—
ment condition and comparing the results to one control
group not receiving the treatment. Possible effects of

the pretest are controlled for by also providing a group

who received the posttest only.

The pretest was a mailed, self-administered questionnaire
submitted to the entire population; the Michigan Chapter
of American Society of Interior Designers (MASID). This
was mailed in May 1977. The treatment was a lecture/slide

presentation given to those self-selected subjects of the

31

population that attended the June 1977 MASID meeting held
in East Lansing, Michigan. The presentation was given by
this researcher and Dr. Cerwyn Kline of Lansing Community
College. (See text in Appendix.) The posttest was a

mailed, self-administered questionnaire submitted to the

entire MASID population in November 1977.

SAMPLED POPULATION (n=312)

 

The American Society of Interior Designers is the world's
largest association representing the profession of interior
design. As a professional society, it is dedicated to serve
the entire profession and to maintain the highest possible

standards for the practice of interior design.

Its professional membership includes designers in both
contract and residential design. These include designers

in private practice, design consultants, designers employed
by major corporations or architectural firms, and designers
employed by furniture and department stores. The philosophy
of the Society is that the greater needs of the professional
can best be served by one strong organization, and its
programming is directed toward these many specialized groups

within its membership.

The Michigan Chapter, the sampled population, is a state

member of the national organization.

SELECTION OF THE SAMPLE

 

The questionnaires were mailed to all members of the
population, MASID. The sample thus became a non-random,
self-selected sub-set of the population who responded to
the questionnaires. Since the subjects of the sample are
all members of MASID, the group members are as similar as
availability permits. This will be controlled for by

comparison of pretest means.

Other types of control were used for internal validity.
Control for self-selection of the sample was achieved by
comparing the demo-graphic data of the sample with the
population data available from MASID, to be certain the
sample was representative of the entire population. Also,
the subjects of the sample may be self-selected but are
not volunteers. They did not volunteer to come to the
treatment. Finally, the experimental group and control

group were from the same population.

Experimental Group: Those members of MASID who responded
to pretest and posttest questionnaire and received the

treatment by attending the June 1977 meeting.
Control Group: Those members of MASID who responded to

pretest and posttest questionnaires and did not receive

the treatment by attending the June 1977 meeting.

32

TABLE 1: DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLE

 

 

Group Number of Cases
Population 312
Responded to pretest questionnaire 79
Responded to posttest questionnaire 69
Responded to pretest and posttest questionnaire 36
Experimental group 19
Control Group 17
Responded to posttest questionnaire only 25

To increase the size of the sample, the entire population
was sent both questionnaires with the respondents then

being placed into groups.

With a total population of 312, the response to the pretest
questionnaire was twenty-five percent and the response to
the posttest questionnaire was twenty-two percent. The
control group consisted of five percent of the population
and forty-seven percent of the sample who responded to both
questionnaires. The experimental group consisted of six
percent of the population and fifty-three percent of the

sample who responded to both questionnaires.

33

 

TABLE 2: MEMBERSHIP STATUS

 

 

Status P0pulation Z Experimental Z Control Z
Professional 183 59 8 ‘42 6 35
Associate 114 37 11 58 11 65
Educational 10 4 O 0
TOTAL 312 100 19 100 17 100

Both the experimental and control groups have a similar
number of subjects from the two most populated status
levels, thus making each group representative of the other.
It is interesting to note that a higher percentage of asso-
ciate members responded to the questionnaire, and no educa-

tional members.

TABLE 3: AGE

 

 

Population Experimental Z Control Z
20-29 na 9 47 l 6
30-39 na 6 32 6 35
40-49 na 0 6 35
50-59 na 4 21 2 12
60-69 na 0 2 12
over 70 na 0 0
TOTAL 19 100 17 100

Population data on this variable was not available for this
research. It would appear the experimental group has some-
what younger subjects, with seventy-nine percent under the
age of 40. The control group has a majority of subjects,

seventy percent between the ages of 30 and 50.

34

TABLE 4: SEX

Population Z Experimental Z Control Z

 

Female 197 63 10 53 9 53
Male '115 37 9 47 8 47
TOTAL 312 100 19 100 17 100

The sex variable is evenly distributed between the control

and experimental groups, each have fifty-three percent

female respondents and forty-seven percent male respondents.

This distribution differs slightly but still points in the
same direction as the population, which is sixty-three

percent female and thirty-seven percent male.

TABLE 5: HIGHEST EDUCATION LEVEL

 

Population Experimental Z Control

Z

 

High School na -—— -- --- --
Professional or technical na --- -- 2 12
College work/no degree na 3 16' 5 29
Bachelor's degree na 9 47 7 41
Graduate work/no degree na 4 21 1 6
Graduate degree na 3 16 2 12
TOTAL 19 100 , 17 100

All subjects have more than a high school education, with a
minimum of technical or professional training. Eighty-four
percent of the experimental group has a bachelor's degree
or higher. The control group shows fifty-nine percent with
a bachelor's degree or higher. Both groups show highly
educated subjects, with the distribution between groups
quite similar.

35

TABLE 6: INCOME-ANNUAL

 

 

 

Population Experimental Z Control Z
$1000-S4999 na 0 0
$5000-$9999 na 0 2 12
310000-314999 na 5 26 2 12
$15000-$19999 na 2 10 3 18
$20000-$24999 na 3 16 l 5
$25000—over na 6 32 7 41
Missing data 3 16 2 12
TOTAL 19 100 17 100

Over fifty percent of each group is in an income level of
$20,000 plus. The distribution appears similar between the
experimental and control groups, with the majority of each

earning over $20,000 per year.

COLLECTION OF THE DATA

 

Prior to distribution of the questionnaire, there was a
need to establish that the professional group of—interior
designers had the information needed for the research. To
achieve that, ten interior designers, consisting of eight
professionals and two educators, were pilot tested. These
ten interior designers were professionals from outside the
MASID population. That pilot test was then analyzed to
determine bias, ambiguities, other responses to be included
in the questionnaire and which methods of analysis would be

most appropriate.

Upon completion of any corrections the pretest questionnaire

was mailed to the MASID along with a letter of introduction.

\

36

37

The letter of introduction (see Appendix), gave the
purpose of the research, the end-use of the results,
provided credibility for the researcher by being identi-
fied as a professional, associated the research with
Michigan State University and stressed the value of the
information gained from individual responses. This

letter also explained the coding process of the question-
naire so the subject was assured of the anonymity of her/
his response. A similar letter was sent with the November
1977 questionnaire (see Appendix), with the same object-
ives in mind. A follow-up letter (see Appendix) was mailed

in January 1978 to increase response.

PROCESSING THE DATA

 

After the completed questionnaires were returned to the
researcher (the pretest questionnaire prior to the June
1977 treatment and the posttest questionnaire by March
1978), the data were checked for completeness of the
responses. The raw data were then transferred to coding
sheets by a team of coders. The key punching and verifi-
cation were done by the Michigan State University keypunch
office of the Computer Center. After the cards were
returned to the researcher, they were further verified

against the raw data and found to be extremely accurate.

ANALYSIS OF DATA

 

For the purposes of this research, it was necessary to
recode the original data from the questionnaires. The
following Operational definitions focus on the ways the
original data were transformed in order to be used in the

analysis of the data for this research.

OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

 

Dependent Variables: (See Appendix B for specific questions)
(1) Awareness of the Energy Problem: (1) belief in the
energy crisis

(II) Interest in Providing a Solution to the Energy
.Problem: (1) sense of responsibility to make environment
energy efficient, (2) willingness to incorporate design
innovations using solar energy

(III) Evaluation of the Innovation: (1) knowledge of solar
design techniques

(IV) Adoption of the Innovation: (1) willingness to adopt
energy efficiency as a design ethic, (2) use of energy
conserving techniques, (3) considering prevention of heat
loss when designing window treatments, and (4) willingness

to use sun resistant textiles.

Independent Variables:
No recoding occurred with the independent variables as they

are easily understood demographic descriptors.

(I) Membership Status in ASID
(II) Years worked as an interior designer
(III) Hours worked per week as an interior designer (both

in the studio and out of the studio)

(IV) Number of designers on the staff of the studio where
employed

(V) Population of service area

(VI) ' Highest educational level

(VII) Sex
(VIII) Age

(IX) Income
(X) Experimental Group
(XI) Control Group

38

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

 

Analysis was done by means of CDC 6500 computer using the

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences program.

The statistical analysis of this research design was carried
out to see the relationship between an independent dichoto-
mized variable, the control and experimental group, and a
dependent variable, awareness, interest, evaluation or

adoption.

In order to determine if a difference existed between the
control group and the experimental group, the t-test was
used. This statistic allows a test of the null hypothesis
that there is no significant difference between the sample
means of the control group and the experimental group,

particularly appropriate for small samples.

Because of the high educational level, an analysis of
variance was also run between the experimental and control
groups with the variable evaluation with education level

used as a covariate.

Frequencies were also used to determine the response char-
acteristics of the sample. The frequency tables are shown
on the following pages and are used to support conclusions

and implications in the summary.

39

 

TABLE 7:

FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE FOR VARIABLE AWARENESS

 

 

 

 

 

Group Response Pretest Posttest
Control Yes 88.2Z 86.7Z
No 11.8Z 13.3Z
Experimental Yes 78.9Z 73.7Z
No 21.1Z 26.3Z
Posttest Only Yes --- 66.7Z
No --- 33.3Z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 8: FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE FOR VARIABLE INTEREST

Group Response Pretest Posttest

Control Definite Interest 82.1Z 94.1Z
Indication of Interest 17.6Z 5.9%
No Interest --- ---

Experimental Definite Interest 78.9Z 84.2Z
Indication of Interest 21.1Z 15.8Z
No Interest --— --~

Posttest Only Definite Interest --— 87.5Z
Indication of Interest ——— 12.5Z

No Interest

 

 

 

 

40

 

 

 

TABLE 9:

FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE FOR VARIABLE EVALUATION

 

 

 

 

 

Group Response Pretest Posttest
Control Complete Knowledge 5.9Z 5.9Z
Some Knowledge 35.3Z 29.4Z
Very Little Knowledge 11.8Z 5.9Z
No Knowledge Stated 5.9Z 5.9Z
Incorrect Knowledge --- --—
No Answer Given 41.2Z 52.9Z
Experimental Complete Knowledge 10.5Z 31.6Z
Some Knowledge 21.1Z 21.1Z
Very Little Knowledge 36.8Z ---
No Knowledge Stated 5.3Z 10.5Z
Incorrect Knowledge --- ---
No Answer Given 26.3Z 36.8Z
Posttest Only Complete Knowledge --- 8.0Z
Some Knowledge --- 4.0Z
Very Little Knowledge --- 4.0Z
No Knowledge Stated --- 12.0Z
Incorrect Knowledge -—— ——-
No Answer Given --- 72.0Z

 

 

 

 

41

 

 

TABLE 10: FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE FOR VARIABLE ADOPTION

 

 

 

 

 

Group Response Pretest Posttest
Control Willing to Adopt 81.3Z 87.5Z
Not Willing to Adopt 12.5Z 6.3Z
Indication of Willing-4
ness 6.5Z 6.3Z
Experimental Willing to Adopt 76.5Z ' 66.7Z
Not Willing to Adopt 17.6Z 22.2Z
Indication of Willing- 5.9Z 11.1Z
ness
Posttest Only Willing to Adopt --- 77.3%
Not Willing to Adopt --- 13.6Z
Indication of Willing- --- 9.1Z

 

HESS

 

 

 

42

 

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

43

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF DATA

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter contains the results of the analysis of the
data. For each hypothesis, the results of the statistical
tests are reported and followed by discussion of the find-
ings. Conclusions and implications will be found in the

next chapter.

Each dependent variable was analyzed for both pretest and
posttest mean scores of the control and experimental groups.
By testing for level of significance of pretest mean scores,
a control was provided for any significance that may be
found in the posttest mean score. That is, if the mean
scores of the two independent variables, control and exper-
imental groups, showed no significant difference in a
dependent variable, and there was a significant difference
in a dependent variable, the difference can be attributed

to the treatment received by the experimental group.

The significance level for each hypothesis was set at .10.
The primary rational for setting this level of significance
so high was because the diffusion and innovation of energy
efficient design techniques had not been researched. By
providing a broader range for the data to support or not
support the hypothesis, the probability was increased for
the data to show significance. Thus increasing the chances
of disclosing trends which could be important to further

research.

44

Hypothesis I:

45

There is no difference between the means of

the control group and experimental group in awareness of

the energy problem.

Significance level: .10

The findings are shown in Table 11.

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 11: T-TEST RESULTS FOR VARIABLE AWARENESS
Number of Percent Significance
cases Mean change level

Control
Group Pretest 17 1.1176

8% p=.356
Experimental
Group Pretest 19 1.2105
Control
Group Posttest l7 ~l.133

10Z p=.344
Experimental
Group Posttest 19 1.2632

 

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

There was no significant level of

difference between the means

of the control and experimental groups.

was not rejected.

The null hypothesis

The means of the pretest and posttest were very similar

between both groups, with only 8% and 10% change shown.

There was 75 percent overall belief in the energy shortage

by both groups as shown by the frequency of responses in

 

46

Table 7. However, it can be seen there was only 66 percent
awareness for the posttest only scores of frequency. It
would appear the pretest questionnaire may have had an
effect on the posttest scores, but the treatment had very

little effect on the posttest scores.

Hypothesis II: There is no difference between the means
of the control group and experimental group in interest in
providing a solution to the energy problem.

Significance level: .10

The findings are shown in Table 12.

 

TABLE 12: T-TEST RESULTS FOR VARIABLE INTEREST

 

 

 

Number of Percent Significance
cases Mean change level
Control
Group Pretest 17 1.3529
SZ p=.803
Experimental
Group Pretest 19 1.4211
Control
Group Posttest 17 1.1176
15Z p=.087
Experimental
Group Posttest 19 1.3158

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In comparing the pretest means of the control and exper-
imental group, the mean of the experimental group was
higher than the control group by 5 percent, with a sig-
nificance level of p=.803. The very little difference

in mean scores between the two groups indicated the simi—

larity of the interest level.

When comparing the posttest mean scores, the mean of the
experimental group was higher than the control group by 15
percent, with a significance level of p=.087. This fell
within the .10 level of significance set for rejecting or
not rejecting the hypothesis, which indicated a significant
difference in interest levels between the control and exper-
imental group. The higher mean was coded to reflect a
higher interest level. Since the experimental group mean
score was higher than the control group, it showed the
significant difference was not sampling error but may be
due to the treatment. Therefore, the null hypothesis was

rejected.

Frequency Table 8 shows an extremely high level of interest
in providing a solution, over 84 percent for all posttest
scores, with no responses for the no interest category. The
posttest only group was consistent with the other two groups,

showing it was a control for the Hawthorne effect.

Hypothesis III: There is no difference between the means
of the control group and experimental group in evaluation
of the innovation.

Significance level: .10

47

48

The findings are shown in Table 13.

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 13: T-TEST RESULTS FOR VARIABLE EVALUATION
Number of Percent Significance
cases Mean change level

Control
Group Pretest 17 3.7059

12Z p=.652
Experimental
Group Pretest 19 4.2105
Control
Group Posttest 17 3.8235

24Z p=.76l
Experimental
Group Posttest 19 2.8947

 

 

 

 

 

 

PLEASE NOTE: A decrease in the mean score is actually a
positive increase in knowledge since the arbitrarily
assigned coded integers indicate a lower raw score for

more complete knowledge.

DISCUSSION:

 

In comparison of the mean of the control and experimental
group, pretest scores, the mean of the experimental group
was higher by 12 percent, with a significance level of p=.652.
No significant difference between the two means showed the
similarity of the two groups on the variable evaluation of

the innovation.

49

The posttest means of the control and experimental group
showed the experimental group mean 24 percent lower than
the control group, with a significance level of p=.76l.

No level of significant difference was indicated so the
hypothesis was not rejected. There was a 31 percent higher
mean score between the pretest experimental group and

the posttest experimental group. This indicated the treat-
ment did have some effect on the level of knowledge increase,
although not significant in a T-Test. However, an analysis
of variance was done on this variable with education level
as a covariate. It showed a .087 level of significance
which would lead to rejection of a sub hypothesis: There
is no difference between the means in evaluation of the
innovation between education levels of the control group

and the treatment group at the .10 level of significance.

Frequency Table 9 shows the posttest only group with a

low level of knowledge, 72 percent not even giving a
response to these questions. The frequency of response

in each category specified somewhat less knowledge for

the posttest only group than the control group. It could
be inferred from this that the pretest questionnaire acted
as a treatment for the control group. However, there was
a 12 percent overall decrease in knowledge for the control
group from pretest to posttest response which contradicted
the effect of the pretest questionnaire or the Hawthorne

effect.

50

Hypothesis IV: There is no difference between the means
of the control group and experimental group in adoption
of the innovation.

Significance level: .10

The findings are shown in Table 14.

 

TABLE 14: T-TEST RESULTS FOR VARIABLE ADOPTION

 

 

 

 

Number of Percent Significance
cases Mean change level
Control
Group Pretest 17 1.1765
2% p=.756
Experimental
Group Pretest 19 1.1579
Control
Group Posttest 17 1.1176
18Z p=.345
Experimental
Group Posttest 19 1.3684

 

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In comparing the pretest means of the control and exper-
imental group, the mean of the experimental group was lower
than the control group by 2 percent, with a significance
level of p=.756. This showed a very similar pretest compar-
ison and indicates a similarity of adoption between the two

groups.

 

51

The means of the control and experimental posttest scores
showed the experimental mean higher by 18 percent, with a
significance level of p=.345. Again no significant differ-
ence existed, the null hypothesis was not rejected. How-
ever, there was a 15 percent increase in the mean score
between the pretest experimental group and the posttest
experimental group. The higher mean was coded to reflect
an increased willingness to adopt. This could indicate

a slight increase in the willingness to adopt the innova-

tion after receiving the treatment.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

52

CHAPTER V
OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

Well designed interior environments have always been the
goal of the interior designer. In the past, "well designed"
has meant functional and aesthetically pleasing. But
function has seldom included energy efficiency as a primary
factor. Today, with the documented energy problem, well
designed buildings should be both energy efficient and
aesthetically pleasing. Buildings and their interiors can
be designed with full consciousness of energy and its
attendant constraints or they can be designed with little
regard for energy efficiency. There is a great potential
for energy conservation which can be offered by the pro-
fessional interior designer. They can help create a solu-

tion for the energy problem, without loss of design quality.

A major concern of this research has been to evaluate the
interior designer's knowledge of the energy problem and its
alternative solutions. Rogers' diffusion of innovation
theory was the underlying framework by which this evalua-
tion occurred. Rogers' theory introduced the process,
adoption of an innovation. In particular, energy conserving
solar design techniques were introduced to a social system,
Michigan Chapter of American Society of Interior Designers
‘and provided a method of indicating the extent to which the
innovation, energy efficient design, has been considered
for adoption and possible implementation by the individual
members of MASID. Rogers' innovative-decision process was

used to evaluate the interior designers' present knowledge

53

of energy efficient design concepts and their stated support

to adopt energy efficiency as a new design ethic.

The four stages of the individual innovative-decision pro—
cess were used as the four dependent variables analyzed in
this research. These were operationalized as: (l) aware-
ness, (2) interest, (3) evaluation and, (4) adoption.
These dependent variables were defined as the stages of

the decision-making process interior designers pass through
toward the adoption of innovative energy efficient interior

design techniques.

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS

Hypothesis 1: There is no difference between the means of
the control group and experimental group in

awareness of the energy problem.

Analytic

No significant difference was found between the means of
the experimental and control groups on the awareness measures,
therefore, the hypothesis was not rejected. Also, the fre-
quencies showed no meaningful change from the pretest score
to the posttest score in either the control or experimental
group. (See Table 6). One explanation for this could be
the fact that the interior designers are part of the larger
population, public consumers. Members of both groups were
educated consumers that may have been reached by public
media, newspapers and television, which have focused some

attention on the energy problem.

Speculative

 

Of primary importance in trying to explain difference from
pretest to posttest scores is the frequency of response. In
the preteSt, over seventy—five percent of the sample believed
there was an energy problem. (See Table 6). It is difficult
to increase awareness of belief in a sample of this size with
the awareness variable at such a high percentage of belief.
Finally, interior designers are business oriented. Short
supply of resources in industry affect their business.
Designers would already be aware of the energy problem from

a business viewpoint as well as a consumer point of view.

55

56

Hypothesis II: There is no difference between the means of
the control group and experimental group in

awareness of the energy problem.

Analytic

The analysis showed a significant increase in interest level
of the experimental group over the control group, therefore,

the null hypothesis was rejected.

Speculative

 

One possible conclusion for the increase in interest by the
experimental group was the information gained in the treat-
ment. The energy problem, perhaps was brought into clear
perspective by the treatment (an energy presentation at an
ASID meeting of June 8, 1977). The treatment, perhaps,
raised the designer's interest from the consumer level to
the professional and business level. The treatment was
developed to help the designer understand ways to serve

the client by increasing energy efficiency in the interior.

The treatment may have introduced, another professional and
business concern, the marketability of an interior designer
who is capable of creating energy efficient interiors. By
providing this service, the interior designer could increase
business and therefore their income. There was a possibility
of a loss of income indicated if the designer did not move

in this direction. And also, since the general public, and
thus the client, is now more aware of the energy problem

than previously, they-will be demanding more energy efficient

design. This will require more innovation from the designer.

57

By introducing the energy efficient design innovation and
the methods of adopting this innovation, the treatment also
suggested the role an interior designer could play in

creating a solution to the energy problem.

Finally, the interest level could have been increased in
the experimental group because the treatment stressed the
non-technical aspects of solar design, therefore reducing

intimidating technical information.

Hypothesis 111: There is no difference between the means of
the control group and experimental group in

evaluation of the innovation.

Analytic

There was no significant difference in mean scores between

the experimental and control groups on the evaluation measures,
thus the hypothesis was not rejected. There was a meaningful
but not significant increase from the pretest mean score to

the posttest mean score of the experimental group. (See

Table 9). It would appear that the treatment provided some

new information about energy to the designer that helped
increase the knowledge of energy efficient design, which was,

if not statistically significant, at least meaningful.

Speculative

 

Even though interior design is an applied art, not a hard
science, the increase in knowledge about energy efficient
design showed the interior designer was not intimidated by
the information needed to consider the innovation. The
frequency scores showed a meaningful increase in the category

'complete knowledge' for the experimental posttest. (See

58

Table 9). Twenty-five percent more of the experimental
group have knowledge of energy efficient design techniques
after the treatment than the control group. Perhaps the
time span between the treatment and posttest was sufficient
to allow the designer to start to integrate the knowledge
learned in the treatment with their design philosophy, if
not their practice, in spite of the non-significant

difference.

Hypothesis IV: There is no difference between the means of
the control group and experimental group in

adoption of the innovation.

Analytic
There was no significant difference between the means of the

experimental and control groups on the measures of adoption,
thus the hypothesis was not rejected. The small decrease in
mean score from the experimental pretest to experimental
posttest demonstrated the effect a small sample can have.
The frequency scores showed only one subject changed from

willing to adopt on pretest to not willing to adopp on

 

 

posttest, yet it caused a ten percent decrease. (See Table
10). A larger sample would not have been so sensitive to

an individual fluctuation.

Speculative

 

The slight decrease from the experimental pretest to experi-
mental posttest came after familiarity with the innovation,
that is, after the treatment. There are several possible
explanations for this slight decrease. The innovation may
have been irrelevant to a subject's business or practice,

therefore creating a neutral or negative response. The

59

innovation could be too difficult or impractical for the
available sources of a particular designer's practice,

which brought a negative response. Finally, the decrease
could relate to those subjects whose knowledge was incom-
plete, as shown in the previous hypotheses. These subjects'
could have been intimidated by their knowledge and, there-

fore gave a negative response to the second questionnaire.

In general, however, the frequency scores showed a high
willingness to adopt the innovation which supports Rogers'
theory. (See Table 10). A final question used to indicate
the stated support by designers for energy efficiency was
their belief that designers should adopt energy efficiency
as a design ethic. In spite of the fact that there was no
significant difference between the means of either group
on pretest or posttest questionnaires, it can be concluded
by the high frequency of response (ninety-seven percent of
all respondents agreed, "that interior designers should
adOpt energy efficiency as a new design ethic,"), that

there was strong support for an adoption of the innovation.

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

 

Analytic
The research did not find support for Rogers' theory of

adoption of innovation. It appeared that the four stages
were not passed through in a sequence process as he postu-
lates. It was found the first two stages, awareness and
interest, may coincide in the individual decision-making

process.

60

The research did find support for placing the subjects of the
sample into the adopter categories of individual innovative-
ness. The results showed the subjects would fall into the

Early Majority category on the variable awareness, the Inno—

 

vator category on the variable interest, the Late Majority

category on the variable evaluation, and the Early Majority

 

category for the variable adoption.

Speculative

 

Rogers' most recent theory about the adoption of innovation
states that there is a probability of two or more of the
stages happening simultaneously. (Rogers, 1971). The
findings of this research tend to support this refinement

of his theory.

The rate of adoption was slower on the evaluation and adoption
variables because of the specific characteristics of the
innovation (1) relative advantage, (2) compatibility, (3)
complexity, (4) trialibility, and (5) observability. These
characteristics are defined in Chapter II. The following
specifically discusses these characteristics:

Awareness and Interest:

 

-showed an increased advantage which was reinforced by the
energy crisis.

-was consistent with existing values.

—was easy to understand.

-was easy to mentally 'try on' for consideration.

-had an observable success rate shown by a comparative

decrease in energy consumption of previous trials.

61

Evaluation and Adoption:

 

-needs of the receivers were not always readily apparent,
however they were consistent with the existing values.
-techniques were more concrete and therefore were more
difficult to understand.

-active trialibility was difficult until clients readily
accept the need for the innovation.

—were easily observed, but first had to obtain a trial.

Finally, this research gave more support to the interior

designer's willingness to adopt the innovation than to the

 

actual implementation and adoption of the innovation.

LIMITATIONS

 

This Study

 

The time element was basic limitation to this study. There
should have been a greater lapse of time between pretest
questionnaire and treatment. The researcher then could
have designed the treatment to cover the unknown questions
on the pretest questionnaire, making the treatment more
valid. Also, more complete control by the researcher over
the treatment could have increased validity of the treat-

ment.

The second way the time element was a limitation was the
short time lapse between the pretest/treatment and the
posttest. A longer time period would have given the
designer more time to implement and adopt the innovation.
The researcher would also have had more time to test and

observe the changes in the subjects.

Another limitation to the research design was the sample

Size and non-random selection of the sample. While the
sample was fairly representative of the population, a large
sample could have been randomly sampled and randomly selected
into control and experimental groups. This would have

increased the internal validity of the design.

A limitation that is true of any research design which uses
a real situation instead of a classroom or experimental
situation is the lack of control of extraneous variables on
the subjects. There is no control over other types of

stimuli the sample may have encountered outside the treatment.

62

63

There is no means of telling if some subjects received
information regarding solar energy or energy conservation
between pretest and posttest. In replicating this

research, this factor could be controlled for with a
question about external influences on the posttest
questionnaire. However, it is still felt by this researcher
that the overwhelming benefits of using real subjects from

the profession outweighed the faults of this limitation.

Finally, while the results of this research can be gener—
alized to the population, that population contains only
the Michigan Chapter of ASID. It would be most beneficial
and instructive for the national ASID organization to

conduct this type of research.

IMPLICATIONS

 

Future Research

 

The major benefit for replicating this research would be

to increase the population to which the findings could be
generalized. Very little applied research has been done

in a profession of applied art. It would be beneficial to
the ASID national organization as a whole, and professional
interior designers specifically, to have an idea of the

status of designers on the energy problem.

A review of the variables used in this study might indicate
those of more significance to the designer. Further research
could then be conducted to get a better focus to help edu-

cate the designer in this direction.

One early implication of this research was a method for
interior designers and design students to obtain informa-

tion relating directly to designing for energy efficiency.

 

In accordance with this need, the researcher wrote a hand-

book for the interior designer titled, Solar Interiors:

 

Energy a New Element in Design. This book has been the
first direct application of the results of the original

research design.

Policy

The frequency of response showed a 97 percent agreement to
the Statement that designers should adopt the design ethic
of energy efficiency.' With this large statement of agree—
ment on this issue, MASID could implement this into their
code of ethics. Thereby becoming the first state chapter
of ASID to implement an energy policy. Further research

64

65

on the national level could constitute a similar policy

implementation.

Education

 

One of the primary concerns of this research was the
evaluation of the professional interior designer's know-
ledge of energy efficient, solar design techniques. An
implication of this concern would be to then implement
energy efficient, solar design techniques into the pro-

fessional design education system.

This research indicated four aspects:

(1) Awareness - Over 75 percent of the interior designer's

 

sampled are aware of the energy problem.

(2) Interest - One hundred percent of the interior de-
signers sampled indicated an interest in providing a
solution to the energy problem, feel a responsibility to
their clients to make their interiors more energy efficient
and are interested in learning more about energy efficient
design. This data (1) provides a justification for initiat-
ing energy efficient design techniques and methods into the
professional educational program, (2) provides justification

for a book such as Solar Interiors: Energy a New Element in

 

 

Design, and (3) justifies implementing seminars on energy
efficient design for the practicing professional interior
designer.

(3) Evaluation - A 25 percent increase in knowledge after

 

the treatment was given indicates the ability of the interior
designer to assimilate and integrate the technical/aesthetic
approach to implementing energy efficient design techniques.
This fact provides justification for giving control over the

66

efficiency and aesthetics of the interior environment to
the interior designer.

(4) Adoption - Over 78 percent of the interior designers
sampled indicate a willingness to adopt energy efficient
design techniques. This justifies the assumption that
interior designers are innovators. They are open to

change and education in basic energy facts would strengthen
their willingness to change. Thereby, increasing the
probability of incorporating the value of energy efficient

design not only as an ethic, but also as an active reality.

APPENDICES

67

APPENDIX A

LETTER OF INTRODUCTION
PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE

68

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

COLLEGE OF HUMAN ECOLOGY EAST LANSING ° MICHIGAN ' 48824
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT AND DESIGN

May 1, 1977

Dear A.S.I.D. Member,

I have been a professional interior designer for the past nine years and am
now entering the profession of interior design education. I am currently
working on my master's thesis in the Department of Human Environment and
Design at Michigan State University. The t0pic area for my thesis concerns
the energy problem from the viewpoint of the interior designer.

For this research to be completed, I need your assistance by filling out the
short questionnaire enclosed. Your cooperation will be of tremendous value
in the initial research.

All responses will be completely confidential. Your response will be assigned

a job number and analyzed accordingly to insure privacy. All data will be an-

alyzed on an aggregate basis, not an individual level, but we do need your name
and address to guard against repetition of data. However, do not underestimate
the importance of your individual response.

I know there are many demands on your time--so why not answer and return the
questionnaire right now? After answering, just fold over and staple as in-
dicated, it is already stamped and addressed for your convenience.

I hope you will enjoy working on this small project. It is a valid research
area and the results will be interesting and productive.

I truly appreciate your time and cooperation.
Sincerely,
* 449,Z( (ERQLZL24L¢\_/

Denise A. Guerin

69

Name
Address

 

 

 

 

Job #

INTERIOR DESIGN AND ENERGY
MAY 1977

The energy problem is a concern of many people tooay. This is an opportunity for
you to express your attitudes and opinions.

Directions: Unless otherwise instructed, please circle the number which best rep-
resents your response to each question.

1. What is your membership status in ASID?
l. associate member
2. professional member
3. educational member

2. How many years have you worked as an interior designer?

1. 1-5 4. 16-20
2. 6-10 5. more than 20
3. 11-15

3. How many hours per week do you work as an interior designer? Please include
both in the studio and out of the studio hours.

1. 1-20 3. 31-40
2. 21-30 4. over 40
4. How many interior designers are on the staff of the studio with which you are
associated?
2. 4-6 5. more than 12
30 7-9
5. What is the population of the service area where your studio is located?
1. under 25,000 4. 125,001-200,000
2. 25,001-75,000 5. 200,001-500,000
3. 75,001-125,000 6. over 500,000
6. What is the highest educational level you have completed?
1. high school 4. bachelor's degree
2. professional or technical 5. graduate work, but no graduate degree
3. college work, but no degree 6. graduate degree
7. Sex
1. female 2. male
8: Age
3. 40-49 - V 6. 70 or over

9. Do you believe there is a shortage of energy today?
1. Yes 2. No

70

10.

11.

12.

l3.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

I

Do you believe the "energy crisis" of 1973 was a "put on" in order to raise
fuel prices?
1. Yes 2. No

Would you pay a higher initial cost to use solar power as an energy source rather
than continue paying the increasing costs of the diminishing fossil fuels?
1. Yes 2. No

According to your belief, rank these factors in order of their importance in
making interior environments more energy efficient. (#l-most important to #6-
1east important)

____insulative properties of textiles

___§un resistent properties of textiles

___reflectance properties of interior materials

___absorption properties of interior materials

___double and triple glazing of windows

___interior and exterior shading devices

What factors do you perceive as comprising a mechanical solar energy system?
(Please give brief description).

Are these factors generally aesthetically pleasing?
1. Yes 2. No

Do these factors interfere with the function of the design solution?
1. Yes 2. No

What factors do you perceive as comprising a passive solar energy system?
(Please give brief description).

Are these factors generally aesthetically pleasing?
1. Yes 2. No

Do these factors interfere with the function of the design solution?
10 Yes 1 I 2. N0 ‘ b: I. ‘

Are you incorporating any energy conserving ideas in your design solutions?
1. Yes 2. No

Would you be willing to incorporate design innovations using solar energy?
1. Yes 2. No

Do you consider prevention of heat loss through windows when you design window
treatments?
1. Yes ° 2. No

What total value do you place on sunlight in the interior environment?
1. Beneficial 2. Detrimental

How much damage does sunlight cause to interior materials?

1. Little : »2. Some 3. Extensive

71

 

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

Do you think it is feasible for an interior designer to design an interior
environment for use with solar energy?
1. Yes 2. No

Do you think that designing with solar concentration in mind would be more costly?
1. Yes 2. No

If there were aesthetically pleasing and functional materials on the market
today for use in interiors with highly concentrated sunlight, would you adopt
these materials in your interior design solutions?

1. Yes 2. No

Do you think designing with solar concentration in mind would be detrimental
to aesthetics?
1. Yes 2. No

Do you, as a designer of interior environments, feel a responsibility to make
these environments as energy efficient as possible?
1. Yes 2. No

If you have a choice between two design solutions where one solution is strictly
an aesthetical solution and the second is strictly a functional solution,

which one would you choose?

1. Aesthetics 2. Function

Have you ever designed an interior for a building that uses solar energy?

1. Yes 2. No

I feel all interior designers must adopt the design ethic of energy efficiency.
1. Strongly agree 4. Disagree

2. Agree 5. Strongly disagree

3. No opinion

Would you be interested in knowing how an interior designer can increase energy
efficiency in an environment by implementing aesthetical changes?
1. Yes 2. No

I greatly appreciate your contribution to this research project. The results of this
questionnaire will be available to you at a future ASID meeting.

Comments:

72

APPENDIX B
LETTER OF INTRODUCTION

POSTTEST QUESTIONNAIRE
FOLLOW-UP LETTER

73

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

COLLEGE OF HUMAN ECOLOGY EAST LANSING ° MICHIGAN ' 48824
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT AND DESIGN

November 12, 1977

Dear A.S.I.D. Member,

As you may remember, I am working on my master's degree at Michigan State
University. I am nearing the completion of my research and need your
further c00peration.

Enclosed is the second and final questionnaire relating to interior design
and energy. I appreciate the sincere response the first questionnaire
received and hope this final one will receive your equal attention.

At first glance, some questions may seem identical to questions on the
previous survey. This is because the comparison or responses to duplicate
questions on each survey is basic to the success of my research.

I feel your response to this questionnaire is of prime importance in re-

1ating attitudes and concerns about energy to interior design. Having

practiced as an interior designer, I know the designer with experience in

the field is the person whose opinion is most timely. The response of
practicing professionals is the basis for making this energy project so valid.
You, the professional, are the one whose opinion we value when determining

the status of design and energy. Again, all responses are strictly confidential.

I realize this is a very busy time of year for everyone, but please take a
few moments to complete and return the questionnaire by December 20. Your
input is vital to the research and the outcome of my project.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Haw/CW

Denise A. Guerin

74

NAME

 

ADDRESS

 

 

JOB 1i

INTERIOR DESIGN AND ENERGY.
NOVEMBER 1977

DIRECTIONS: Unless otherwise instructed, please circle the number which best rep—

resents your response to each question. If you responded to the May
questionnaire, please go directly to question #9.

 

 

 

1. What is your membership status in ASID?
1. associate member
2. professional member
3. educational member
2. How many years have you worked as an interior designer?
1. 1-5 4. 16-20
2. 6-10 5. more than 20
3. 11-15
3. How many hours per week do you work as an interior designer? Please include
both in the Studio and out of the studio hours. -
2.' 21-30 4. over 40
4. How many interior designers are on the staff of the studio with which you are
associated?
1. 1-3 4. 10-12
2. 4-6 5. more than 12
3. 7-9
5. What is the population of the service area where your studio is located?
1. under 25,000 4. 125,001-200,000
2. 25,001-75,000 5. 200,001-500,000
3. 75,001-125,000 6. over 500,000
6. What is the highest educational level you have completed?
1. high school 4. bachelor's degree
2. professional or technical S. graduate work, no graduate degree
3. college work, no degree 6. graduate degree
7. Sex
1. female 2. male
8. Age
1. 20-29 4. 50-59
2. 30-39 5. 60-69
3. 40-49 6. 70 or over
9. Do you believe there is a shortage of enefgy today?
1. Yes 2. No
10. Do you believe the "energy crisis" of 1973 was a "put on" in order to raise fuel
prices? '
1. Yes 2. No

75

 

11. Would you pay a higher initial cost to use solar power as an energy source rather
than continue paying the increasing costs of the diminishing fossil fuels?
1. Yes 2. No

12. According to your belief, rank these factors in order of their importance in
making interior environments more energy efficient. (#l-most important to #6-
least important).

___insulative properties of textiles

___sun resistant prOperties of textiles
___ref1ectance properties of interior materials
___absorption properties of interior materials
___double and triple glazing of windows
___}nterior and exterior shading devices

13. What factors do you perceive as comprising a mechanical solar energy system?
(Please give brief description).

If you give no reaponse to #13, please go directly to #16.

 

 

14. Are these factors generally aesthetically pleasing?
1. Yes 2. No

15. Do these factors interfere with the function of the design solution?
1. Yes 2. No

 

16. What factors do you perceive as comprising a passive solar energy system?
(Please give brief description).

If you give no response to #16, please go directly to #19.

 

 

17. Are these factors generally aesthetically pleasing?
1. Yes ' 2. No

18. Do these factors interfere with the function of the design solution?
1. Yes 2. No

 

19. Are you incorporating any energy conserving ideas into your design solutions?
1. Yes 2. No

20. Would you be willing to incorporate design innovations using solar energy?
1. Yes 2. No

21. Do you consider prevention of heat loss through windows when you design window
treatments?
1. Yes 2. No

22. What total value do you place on sunlight in the interior environment?
1. Beneficial 2. Detrimental

23. How much damage does sunlight cause to interior materials?‘
1. Little 2. Some 3. Extensive

76

 

 

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

Do you think it is feasible for an interior designer to design an interior
environment for use with solar energy?
1. Yes 2. No

Do you think that designing with solar concentration in mind would be more costly?
1. Yes 2. No

If there were aesthetically pleasing and functional materials on the market
today for use in interiors with highly concentrated sunlight, wOuld you adopt
these materials in your interior design solutions?

1. Yes 2. No

Do you think designing with solar concentration in mind would be detrimental
to aesthetics?
1. Yes 2. No

Do you, as a designer of interior environments, feel a responsibility to make
these environments as energy efficient as possible?

1. Yes 2. No

Have you ever designed an interior for a building that uses solar energy?

1. Yes ' 2. No

I feel all interior designers must adopt the design ehtic of energy efficiency.
1. Strongly agree 4. Disagree

2. Agree 5. Strongly disagree

3. No opinion

In which method, of obtaining information on designing for solar energy and
energy efficient environments, would you be most interested?

1. booklet or pamphlet directed to interior designers

2. 2-3 day seminar for interior designers

3. additional presentations at ASID chapter meetings

4. course for interior designers, 5-10 weeks, one night per week

5. other, please list

What is your approximate annual income?

1. $1,000-S4999 4. $15000-$19999
2. $5000-$9999 5. $20000-$24999

3. $10000-$14999 6. $25000 or over

Did you attend the June 8 ASID meeting held in East Lansing?
1. Yes 2. No

Since you have contributed research data, would you like a summation of my thesis
upon its completion?
1. Yes 2. No

I greatly appreciate your time and contribution to this research project.

Thank you.

Comments:

77

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

COLLEGE OF HUMAN ECOLOGY EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ' 48824
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT AND DESIGN

Dear A.S.I.D. Member,

Many thanks for your response to the Energy/Design questionnaire.
The research will be completed as soon as all responses are
analyzed.

Since there was a mail slow-down at the time the questionnaire
was sent out, you may not have received yours before the dead-
line. That deadline has now been extended so you can still
respond and return the questionnaire. PLEASE do so at once.
Your response is vital.

If you no longer have the questionnaire, please drop me a note
and a new one will be sent. I appreciate your concern and time.
Thank you.

Sincerely,

Denise A. Guerin

78

BIBLIOGRAPHY

79

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPY

 

ASHRE, Handbook of Fundamentals, 1965.

 

ASHRE, Handbook of Fundamentals, 1973.

 

.Bartell, Ted

"The Effects of the Energy Crisis on Attitudes and Life-
style of Los Angeles Residents"

Montreal: Paper presented at the meeting of American

Sociological Association, 1974.

Berlo, D.
The Process of Communication
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960.

 

Berlo, D., Lemert, J., and Mertz, R.

"Dimensions for Evaluating the Acceptability of Message
Sources"

Michigan State University: Mimeographed report, 1966.

Bettinghaus, E.
Persuasive Communication
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

 

Blalock, Hubert M., Jr.
Social Statistics
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1972.

 

Caplow, Theodore, and Raymond, John

"Factors Influencing the Selection of Pharmaceutical Pro-
ducts"

Journal of Marketing, Vol. 19, 1954

Carlson, Richard 0.

Adoption of Educational Innovations

University of Oregon: Center for the Advanced Study of
Educational Administration, 1965.

Coleman, James S.; et al.
"The Diffusion of an Innovation"
Sociometry, Vol 20, 1957.

 

80

Cox, D.R.
Planning of Experiments
New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958.

 

Deutschmann, Paul, and Danielson, Wayne
"Diffusion of the Major News Story"
Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 37, 1960.

Deutschmann, Paul, and Borda, Orland Falls

Communication and Adoption Patterns in an Andean Village
San Jose, Costa Rica: Programa Inter-Americano do Infor-
macion Popular, 1962.

 

Eccli, Eugene
Low-Cost, Energy-Efficient Shelter
Emmaus, Pennsylvania: Rodale Press, Inc., 1976.

 

Energy Research and DevelOpment Administration
Solar Energy in America's Future, A Preliminary Assessment
Washington, D.C.: Division of Solar Energy, March 1977.

Ewers, William L.
Solar Energy, A Biased Guide

Northbrook, Illinois: International Library of Ecology,
1977.

 

Fearon, Robert A., A.I.A.

"Countdown to a Crisis"

Manager of Building Design and Engineering
Michigan Bell Telephone Company, 1977.

Gardner, John
Self Renewal
New York: Drake Publishing Company, 1965.

 

Greenberg, Bradley S., and Parker, Edwin (eds.)
The Kennedy Assassination and the American Public
California: Stanford University Press, 1965.

 

Guerin, Denise A.
Solar Interiors: Energy a New Element in Desigp
Michigan State University: Unpublished manuscript, 1978.

 

Hagerstrand, Torsten
The PrOpagation of Innovation Waves
Lund, Sweden: Lund Studies in Geography, 1952/

 

Halacy, D.S.
The Coming Age of Solar Energy
New York: Avon Books, 1963.

 

81

Hastings, Robert S., and Crenshaw, Richard W.

Window Design Strategies to Conserve Energy
Washington D.C.: NBS Building Science Series 104
Energy Research and Develpment Administration, 1977.

 

Hawkins, Brian L.

"An analysis of Decision-Making Process in Educational
Organizations"

Michigan State University: Thesis, 1972.

Heberlein, Thomas A.

"Conservation Information: The Energy Crisis and Electric-
ity Consumption in an Apartment Complex"

Energy Systems and Policy, Vol. 1, 1975.

 

Hoelscher, Sharon L.
"Diffusion of Energy Information and Changing Behavior"
Michigan State University: Graduate paper, 1977.

Isaac, Stephen, and Michael, William B.
Handbook in Research and Evaluation
California: Edits Publishers, 1977.

Jain, Nemi C.

"Communication Patterns and Effectiveness of Professionals
Performing Linking Roles in a Research Dissemination Or-
ganization"

Michigan State University: Dissertation, 1970.

Karlson, George
Social Mechanisms: Studies in Sociological Theory
New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1958.

Katz, E., Levin, M., and Herbert, H.
"Traditions of Research on Diffusion of Innovation"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 28, 1963.

 

Keyes, John
Harnessing the Sun to Heat Your House
New York: Morgan and Morgan Publishers, 1975

Kirk, Roger E.

Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behaviorial
Sciences '
California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 1968.

Kohlenberg, Robert, Phillips, Thomas, and Proctor, William
"A Behaviorial Analysis of Peaking in Residential Electrical
Energy Consumers"

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Vol. 1, 1976.

82

Linn, Nan
"Innovation Internalization in a Formal Organization"
Michigan State University: Dissertation, 1966.

Lionberger, Herbert F.
Adoption of New Ideas and Practices
Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1960.

 

Morrison, Bonnie, Keith, Joanne, and Zuiches, James
"Energy Impact on Michigan Families"

Michigan State University: Report to National Research
Council, 1976.

Morrison, Denton E., and Hinkel, Ramon E., (eds.)
The Significance Test Controversy; A Reader
Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1970.

 

Newman, Dorothy K., and Day, Dawn
Massachusetts: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1975.

Olgyay, Aldar, and Olgyay, Victor
Solar Control and Shading Devices
New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1972.

 

Perlman, Robert, and Warren, Roland

"Effects of the Energy Crisis on Households of Different
Income Groups"

San Francisco: Paper presented at Annual Meeting of Society
for the Study of Social Problems, 1975.

Rettke, Joanne H.

" Women and New Topics: A Communication Strategy for In-
creasing Individual Adoption of Change"

Michigan State University: Thesis, 1974.

Rogers, Everett M.
Diffusion of Innovation
New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1962.

 

Rogers, Everett M.
Communication Strategies for Family Planning
New York: Free Press, 1973.

 

Rogers, Everett M., and Shoemaker, F. Floyd
Communication of Innovations: A Cross-Cultural Approach
New York: Free Press, 1971

 

Ross, D.H.
Administration for Adoptability
New York: Metropolitan School Study Council, 1958.

 

83

Ryan, Bryce, and Gross, Neal
"The Diffusion of Hybrid Seed Corn in Two Iowa Communities"
Rural Sociology, Vol. 8, 1943

 

Sarbaugh, L. E., Project Director

"A Study of the Diffusion of Ten Educational Products"
Michigan State University: Department of Communication,
College of Communication Arts, 1973

Seaver, W. Burleigh, and Patterson, Arthur H.

"Decreasing Fuel Oil Consumption Through Feedback and Social
Commendation"

.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Vol. 9, 1976

Solar Dwelling Design Concepts
Department of Housing and Urban Development
New York: Drake Publishers, Inc., 1977

Solar Energy Handbook 1978
Popular Science

Stein, Richard G.
Architecture and Energy
1977

 

Talarzyk, W. Wayne, and Omura, Glenn 8.

"Consumer Attitudes Towards and Perceptions of the Energy
Crisis"

Combined Proceedings of the American Marketing Association
1974 Conference

Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1975

 

Watson, Donald
Designing and Building a Solar House
Vermont: Garden Way Publishing, 1977

Wilkening, Eugene A.

"A Sociopsyshological Approach to the Study of the Acceptance
of Innovations in Farming"

Rural Sociology, Vol. 15, 1950

Winnett, Richard A., and Nietzel, Michael T.

"Behavioral Ecology: Contingency Management of Consumer
Energy Use"

American Journal of Community Psychology, 1975

Zuickes, James, Morrison, Bonnie, and Gladhart, Peter

On Interviewing Families Methodology and Design of "Energy
and the Family" Survey. Occasional Paper No. 2, Project 3152,
"Functioning of the Family Ecosystem in a World of Changing
Energy Availability

Michigan State University: Institute for Family and Child
Study, College of Human Ecology, April, 1975

84

"II!IIIIIIIIIIIIII