Rosetta Stone

Research Collection & Content Development Process


Research Process

1.0 Study Aim

A literature review of academic sources was performed to assess the value of high performance design elements. The following research aims guided the study:

  1. Identify empirical research supporting intangible and intangible values of high performance design elements
  2. Translate relevant empirical research in the field of high performance design
  3. Communicate knowledge on how high performance building design elements add value

2.0 Research Methodology

A. Design Element Selection

Design elements are defined as attributes of building design that impact human health, wellbeing, and perceptions of the built environment. Design elements are identified through non-structured literature review by the researchers and professional experience of design industry partners. The final list and priority of design element topics are decided via consensus by a panel of researchers at the University of Washington and design professionals representing 13 architecture firms in Seattle.

B. Literature Review

A literature review of academic sources was conducted for each design element. Relevant academic literature and reports were initially found by searching academic search engines for the keywords including the design element and aspects of value in buildings, such as:

  1. Design element + Wellbeing
  2. Design element + Health
  3. Design element + Value
  4. Design element + Built Environment
  5. Design element + High Performance Design

Additional sources were identified by cross-referencing studies and authors noted by initial sources. As value cases started to emerge in the literature, the literature review keyword search started to include specific value cases as well.

The inclusion criteria of literature in this study was:

  1. Academic article
  2. Report issued by academic or professional working in the field
  3. Relevance to answering research question

The exclusion criteria of literature in this study was:

  1. Published >25 years ago
  2. Report, article, or website that does not cite sources if not primary research

All academic articles were saved in an excel database with the following information recorded:

  1. Title
  2. Authors
  3. Publication date & journal
  4. Article keywords & abstract
  5. Design element it relates to
  6. Type of value it discusses
  7. Short, bullet point summary of article

In addition to this structured literature review, the UW research panel identified seminal research within each topic area, ensuring that key resources were included in the content development.

3.0 Content Development

A. Value case development

After the initial literature review, key value case themes developed through the following process:

  1. The researcher performing the initial literature review identified value causes that were present in the literature
  2. Research group met to discuss the categorization of key themes and identify high-level paper topics
  3. A short, 300-word literature review synopses of each key theme was written (with references)
  4. Research group met to provide feedback on synopses, and decide whether there was enough evidence/research to include in study.

B. Content Development

Content pieces (research briefs, talking points, and introductions) were written after the value case development in the following steps:

  1. Researcher started writing research briefs by expanding on the short synopses described above. The researcher used key topics identified in literature review to write about topic.
  2. Research group reviewed research brief and provided editorial and content review
  3. After research briefs were finalized, talking points were written as bulleted summaries of the research briefs.

C. Expert Content Review [1]

After the internal research team content review, expert reviewers were identified in each subject area. These reviewers provided feedback on content, literature sited, and ensured that topics summarized met a threshold of consensus understanding for each area.

[1] Expert Content Review has been completed for Daylight and Acoustics. Review for other topic areas is currently pending (3/11/21).