Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 33 references

Heatables: Effects of Infrared-LED-Induced Ear Heating on Thermal Perception, Comfort, and Cognitive Performance

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Targeted in-ear infrared LED heating raises perceived ambient temperature by about 1.5°C and improves whole-body comfort without measurable cognitive cost.

desk verdict A novel in-ear NIR/IR heating device with a plausible placebo-controlled comfort effect, but the headline mechanism is untested because the active earpiece also conducts significant heat. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02714 v1 pith:SXOJBDR3 submitted 2025-06-03 cs.HC

Valeria Zitz , Michael Küttner , Jonas Hummel , Michael T. Knierim , Michael Beigl , Tobias Röddiger This is my paper
classification cs.HC
keywords heatablesearableshearablesinfraredstimulationthermalperceptionpersonalcomfortsystemscognitiveperformance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper seeks to establish that optical heating of the ear canal with near-infrared and infrared LEDs can change how warm a person feels, even in a cool room, and that the effect is not just local. In a placebo-controlled study of 24 participants at about 17.5°C, wearing the active earpieces made people estimate the room as roughly 1.5°C warmer, report higher thermal comfort and acceptability at the ear and across the body, and feel cold discomfort later. Stroop test accuracy and reaction times stayed flat, so the warmth came without measurable cognitive cost. If the claims hold, a small, unobtrusive in-ear device could substitute for some room heating and give each person individual thermal comfort without disturbing others.

What carries the argument

Heatables are custom in-ear earpieces housing a multichip LED (MTMD6894T381) that emits at 670 nm, 810 nm, and 950 nm, with only the 810 and 950 nm channels active. The stimulation is pulsed via PWM at 100 Hz with a 59% duty cycle and 300 mA forward current, giving roughly 480 mW input per earpiece; NIR/IR radiation is used because it penetrates several millimeters into soft tissue, warming the vascularized auditory canal rather than only the skin surface. The experimental machinery is a mixed-factorial design with a visually identical but non-thermal placebo, so the manipulated variable is the optical radiative heating path.

What would settle it

Run the same 150-minute, 17.5°C protocol with a third condition in which the earpieces look identical and dissipate the same roughly 480 mW as resistive warmth but emit no NIR/IR light; if perceived ambient temperature and whole-body comfort rise as much as in the active condition, the optical deep-tissue mechanism is not the cause of the reported effect.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the core discovery is that targeted in-ear NIR/IR-LED stimulation acts as a perceptual thermal gateway: localized optical heating of the auditory canal shifts subjective temperature estimates and thermal comfort far beyond the ear. In the active condition, temperature estimates rose significantly at the ear (b=3.42), wrist (b=1.23), and ambient (b=1.20), and thermal perception, acceptability, and comfort improved at both ear and body; the abstract reports the perceived ambient rise as about 1.5°C, while the conclusion reports 1.2°C (95% CI [0.7,1.7]) for ambient and 1.2°C (95% CI [0.3,2.1]) for wrist. A visually identical placebo produced only local ear-level effects on perception and did not improve whole-body comfort. No statistically significant effects appeared on Stroop accuracy, reaction time, or interference, indicating the thermal benefit was not bought at the price of attention or processing speed.

Load-bearing premise

The key assumption is that the visually identical placebo is perceptually indistinguishable from the active device apart from the NIR/IR light, so the measured effects come from optical deep-tissue warming rather than from conductive warmth of the earpiece or from participants knowing the device is on.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claims hold, in-ear heating can deliver a whole-body warmth signal of about 1 to 1.5°C in perceived ambient temperature from a device that fits in the ear.
  • The absence of Stroop effects suggests thermal comfort can be improved without depleting attentional resources, making the approach viable during office work.
  • A wearable that raises perceived warmth could allow lower thermostat set points in shared buildings, shifting part of the comfort burden from HVAC to the individual.
  • Because the placebo failed to produce whole-body effects, the systemic comfort change is attributed to the active IR/NIR stimulus rather than to wearing an earpiece.
  • Future comfort systems could modulate in-ear heating adaptively in response to physiological or environmental sensing.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An untested corollary is that the perceived 1.5°C offset could be converted into an energy-saving strategy: if occupants feel equally comfortable at 17.5°C while wearing the device, heating set points could be lowered by roughly that margin, but the paper does not measure energy use.
  • The paper explicitly notes its design does not isolate radiative from conductive heating; an IR-blocking control that keeps conductive warmth identical would be the decisive test of the optical deep-tissue mechanism.
  • Because local ear-placebo effects did appear on ear perception, expectancy may operate strongly at the stimulation site; deployments that want systemic warmth may need to keep the active state blind to the wearer.
  • The same NIR/IR approach could be tried at other highly vascularized wearable locations, such as behind the ear or the nasal cavity, to see whether the whole-body perceptual shift is specific to the auditory canal.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Heatables, an in-ear wearable with NIR/IR LEDs intended to deliver localized deep-tissue heating to the auditory canal. In a mixed factorial study with 24 participants exposed to a 17.5°C office environment, the device significantly increased subjective temperature estimates (ear, wrist, ambient), improved thermal perception, acceptance, and comfort at the ear and body, and produced no significant changes in Stroop performance. The authors interpret these results as evidence that the ear can serve as a perceptual gateway for whole-body thermal comfort.

Significance. If the effects were attributable to NIR/IR optical deep-tissue warming, the work would open a new direction for personal comfort systems that are unobtrusive and portable. The empirical pattern is internally consistent and the study uses a counterbalanced design with a placebo group. The authors also candidly acknowledge the main methodological limitation. However, the central mechanistic claim is not tested: the active device simultaneously conducts heat to the ear, the placebo is not heat-matched, and no blinding check is reported. The significance of the contribution therefore rests on a plausible but unverified mechanism, which substantially tempers the novelty expressed in the title and abstract.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.2 and §6] The placebo is not heat-matched. With a 480 mW electrical input per earpiece and optical efficiencies of 28% and 9% (Section 3), most of the input is dissipated as conductive heat inside the earpiece, which is in direct contact with the ear canal. The 'visually identical but non-thermal placebo' therefore does not control for conductive warming. Section 6 concedes that the design 'does not isolate radiative from conductive heating.' Since the abstract and title attribute the effects to infrared-induced heating and claim an advantage over resistive heating, this is a load-bearing gap. At minimum, the claims must be reframed to refer to in-ear heating without specifying the mechanism, or the study must be supplemented with an IR-blocking or heat-matched control.
  2. [§4.1 and §4.2] Blinding is compromised. Only participants in the Heatables condition underwent an individualized NIR-IR intensity adjustment, which requires feeling the device warm up. No blinding check is reported, and the asymmetric procedure gives the active arm a concrete cue that their device is active. The observed subjective benefits could partly reflect expectancy. Please report whether participants' guessed condition, and apply the same adjustment procedure (e.g., with the LEDs off) to the placebo condition so that both arms have comparable sensory and procedural experiences.
  3. [§7 and abstract] The claim of 'delayed cold discomfort' is not supported by any reported statistical analysis. The LMMs in Section 5 report main effects of the device on comfort, perception, and acceptance, but no time-to-event or Device × Time interaction analysis that would establish a delay in the onset of discomfort. Either provide the relevant analysis (e.g., testing whether the time course of comfort ratings differs between conditions) or remove this claim from the abstract and conclusion.
  4. [Abstract and §5.3] There is a numerical inconsistency in the headline effect. The abstract states that Heatables 'significantly increased the perceived ambient temperature by around 1.5 degrees Celsius,' but Section 5.3 reports b_ambient = 1.20 and Section 7 states 'approximately 1.2°C (95% CI [0.7, 1.7]).' Please correct the abstract to match the reported estimate.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.4.2] The subsection heading '4.4.2 Thermal Estimation and Subjective Perception' appears to be a copy-paste error; the content describes the Stroop test and cognitive performance. This heading should be corrected.
  2. [§3] The sentence 'It should be noted that the conversion to optical power of the LEDs is inherently limited' is vague. Please quantify the resulting optical power and the expected conductive heat delivered to the ear canal, as these figures are directly relevant to the interpretation of the placebo comparison.
  3. [§5.2] The use of unidirectional (one-sided) tests is non-standard and is applied to all hypotheses without stating the hypothesized direction for each. Please report two-sided p-values in the main text or provide a justification for why one-sided tests are appropriate for each outcome and how the Bonferroni correction was applied given multiple correlated outcomes.
  4. [Figure 4] The figure legend uses 'Heatable/Placebo On/Off' without explaining which line style corresponds to which state in the plots. Since the dashed line marks device attachment/removal, the legend should be explicit about whether the line styles represent the active/placebo device and the order.
  5. [§5.6.1] The UX questionnaire items are not fully specified. For example, the statement 'Many users reported perceiving a noticeable difference compared to regular earbuds' lacks the exact Likert item or question wording, which makes it difficult to interpret the reported mean and standard deviation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported effects are direct empirical comparisons against placebo and control, not derivations from fitted inputs or self-referential definitions.

full rationale

The paper makes no derived prediction or mathematical claim that reduces to its own inputs. Its central results—higher temperature estimates, improved thermal perception, acceptability, and comfort, and unchanged Stroop performance—are estimated with linear mixed-effects models contrasting active Heatables, a visually identical placebo, and a no-device control condition. The individualized NIR/IR intensity adjustment in Section 4.1 tunes the stimulus level per participant, but it is not fitted to the outcome and does not by construction produce the reported effects. Self-citations to OpenEarable 2.0 [24] and prior earable work are incidental hardware/platform references rather than load-bearing justification for the perceptual outcome. The Section 6 limitation that the design 'does not isolate radiative from conductive heating' is a genuine validity concern—the active earpiece could be warming by conduction—but it is a confound, not a circularity: the placebo comparison still tests whether the device as built changes perception, even if the mechanism is not the claimed optical deep-tissue pathway. No equation, fitted parameter, uniqueness theorem, or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work to force the conclusion. Accordingly, the circularity burden is near zero.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on per-participant intensity tuning (one free parameter) and on anatomical and optical assumptions that are cited but not measured in this study. No invented theoretical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Individualized NIR-IR intensity adjustment = not specified
    In Sections 4.1 and 4.3, participants assigned to the Heatables condition received an individualized adjustment of NIR-IR intensity before the session, 'accounting for known interindividual differences in thermal sensitivity.' This per-participant dose is not standardized or reported, so stimulation strength varies across participants and is chosen to make the warming perceptible.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The auditory canal is thermally coupled to core thermoregulation via rich vasculature and proximity to the tympanic membrane and hypothalamus.
    Invoked in the Introduction and Related Work (Section 2), citing [4, 19], to justify the ear as an effective stimulation site.
  • domain assumption NIR/IR radiation from the LEDs penetrates several millimeters into soft tissue and produces meaningful deep warming at the stated input power.
    Invoked in the Abstract, Section 3, and Related Work, citing [8, 11, 28]; no in-ear or tissue temperature measurements are reported to verify this in the study.
  • domain assumption Self-reported temperature estimates and 7-point thermal ratings are valid indicators of thermal perception and comfort.
    The study's outcome variables are subjective; the analysis assumes these measures capture real perceptual changes rather than demand characteristics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Heatables: Effects of Infrared-LED-Induced Ear Heating on Thermal Perception, Comfort, and Cognitive Performance." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SXOJBDR3

@misc{pith2026250602714,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Heatables: Effects of Infrared-LED-Induced Ear Heating on Thermal Perception, Comfort, and Cognitive Performance},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SXOJBDR3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02714}
}
read the original abstract

Maintaining thermal comfort in shared indoor environments remains challenging, as centralized HVAC systems are slow to adapt and standardized to group norms. Cold exposure not only reduces subjective comfort but can impair cognitive performance, particularly under moderate to severe cold stress. Personal Comfort Systems (PCS) have shown promise by providing localized heating, yet many designs target distal body parts with low thermosensitivity and often lack portability. In this work, we investigate whether targeted thermal stimulation using in-ear worn devices can manipulate thermal perception and enhance thermal comfort. We present Heatables, a novel in-ear wearable that emits Near-Infrared (NIR) and Infrared (IR) radiation via integrated LEDs to deliver localized optical heating. This approach leverages NIR-IR's ability to penetrate deeper tissues, offering advantages over traditional resistive heating limited to surface warming. In a placebo-controlled study with 24 participants, each exposed for 150 minutes in a cool office environment (approximately 17.5 degrees Celsius) to simulate sustained cold stress during typical sedentary office activities, Heatables significantly increased the perceived ambient temperature by around 1.5 degrees Celsius and delayed cold discomfort. Importantly, thermal benefits extended beyond the ear region, improving both whole-body comfort and thermal acceptability. These findings position in-ear NIR-IR-LED-based stimulation as a promising modality for unobtrusive thermal comfort enhancement in everyday contexts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02714 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visual overview of experimental conditions and prototype design, captured using a Testo 883-1 infrared thermal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Study procedure illustrating the mixed factorial design. Each participant completed one stimulation session (either [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Box-Whisker plots of: A. temperature estimations; B.-D. subjective assessments of thermal perception, thermal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temporal progression of: A. temperature estimations; subjective assessements of B. temperature perception, C. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ainsworth, William L

    Barbara E. Ainsworth, William L. Haskell, Stephen D. Herrmann, Nathanael Meckes, David R. Bassett, Catrine Tudor-Locke, Jennifer L. Greer, Jesse Vez- ina, Melicia C. Whitt-Glover, and Arthur S. Leon. 2011. 2011 Compendium of Physical Activities: A Second Update of Codes and MET Values.Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise43, 8 (Aug. 2011), 1575–1581. do...

    work page doi:10.1249/mss 2011

  2. [2]

    Shimon Akiyama, Katsunari Sato, Yasutoshi Makino, and Takashi Maeno. 2013. ThermOn: thermo-musical interface for an enhanced emotional experience. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers. ACM, Zurich Switzerland, 45–52. doi:10.1145/2493988.2494326 Heatables: Effects of Infrared-LED-Induced Ear Heating on Thermal Perception...

    work page arXiv 2013

  3. [3]

    1992.ASHRAE Standard: Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occu- pancy

    American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. 1992.ASHRAE Standard: Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occu- pancy. The Society, Atlanta, GA

    work page 1992

  4. [4]

    Juarez M. Avelar. 2013. Surgical Anatomy of the Ear and Neighboring Regions. InEar Reconstruction, Juarez M. Avelar (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1–17. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35683-4_1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35683-4_1 2013

  5. [5]

    Hyun-Chul Cho and Shuzo Abe. 2013. Is two-tailed testing for directional research hypotheses tests legitimate?Journal of Business Research66, 9 (Sept. 2013), 1261–1266. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.023

    doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.023 2013

  6. [6]

    Churchill and Dawn Iacobucci

    Gilbert A. Churchill and Dawn Iacobucci. 2002.Marketing Research: Methodolog- ical Foundations(8th ed.). Harcourt College Publishers, Fort Worth, TX

    work page 2002

  7. [7]

    Williams, Jade L

    Kate Donnan, Emily L. Williams, Jade L. Morris, and Nicholas Stanger. 2021. The effects of exercise at different temperatures on cognitive function: A systematic review.Psychology of Sport and Exercise54 (May 2021), 101908. doi:10.1016/j. psychsport.2021.101908

    arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Vanessa Dos Santos Grandinétti, Eduardo Foschini Miranda, Douglas Scott John- son, Paulo Roberto Vicente De Paiva, Shaiane Silva Tomazoni, Adriane Aver Vanin, Gianna Móes Albuquerque-Pontes, Lucio Frigo, Rodrigo Labat Marcos, Paulo De Tarso Camillo De Carvalho, and Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal-Junior. 2015. The thermal impact of phototherapy with concurrent s...

    work page doi:10.1007/s10103-015-1755-0 2015

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Yingdong He, Xiang Wang, Nianping Li, Meiling He, and De He. 2018. Heating chair assisted by leg-warmer: A potential way to achieve better thermal comfort and greater energy conservation in winter.Energy and Buildings158 (Jan. 2018), 1106–1116. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.006

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    International Organization for Standardization. 2005. ISO 7730: Ergonomics of the Thermal Environment—Analytical Determination and Interpretation of Thermal Comfort Using Calculation of the PMV and PPD Indices and Local Thermal Comfort Criteria. International Standard. ISO 7730:2005

    2005

  3. [11]

    Y. Ito, R. P. Kennan, Eiju Watanabe, and Hideaki Koizumi. 2000. Assessment of heating effects in skin during continuous wave near infrared spectroscopy. Journal of Biomedical Optics5, 4 (2000), 383. doi:10.1117/1.1287730

    2000 doi

  4. [12]

    Jones, Stephen P

    Douglas M. Jones, Stephen P. Bailey, Bart Roelands, Michael J. Buono, and Ro- main Meeusen. 2017. Cold acclimation and cognitive performance: A review. Autonomic Neuroscience208 (Dec. 2017), 36–42. doi:10.1016/j.autneu.2017.11.004

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    Lyle V. Jones. 1952. Test of hypotheses: one-sided vs. two-sided alternatives.Psy- chological Bulletin49, 1 (1952), 43–46. doi:10.1037/h0056832 Place: US Publisher: American Psychological Association

    1952 doi

  6. [14]

    Kalz and Jens Pfafferott

    Doreen E. Kalz and Jens Pfafferott. 2014.Thermal-Comfort Evaluation of Office Buildings in Europe. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 65–108. doi:10. 1007/978-3-319-04582-5_6

    2014

  7. [15]

    Michael Thomas Knierim, Lukas Braun, and Monica Perusquia-Hernandez. 2024. Warmth on Demand: Designing Headphones for Enhanced Thermal Comfort in Work Environments. InExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1–7. doi...

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    Knight and Chris Baber

    James F. Knight and Chris Baber. 2005. A Tool to Assess the Comfort of Wearable Computers.Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society47, 1 (March 2005), 77–91. doi:10.1518/0018720053653875

    2005 doi

  9. [17]

    Zijun Li, Tianhui Yuan, Pengyu Hu, Qian Jia, Qiaoli Wang, and Yu Xu. 2023. Performance research of portable thermoelectric cooling garment under different working conditions.International Journal of Refrigeration150 (June 2023), 327–

    2023

  10. [18]

    J. Liu, Y. Li, M. Quan, J. Zhuang, Z. B. Cao, Z. Zhu, Y. Li, S. D. Herrmann, and B. E. Ainsworth. 2022. Energy Cost of Reclining, Sitting, and Standing Activities in Chinese Adults.International Journal of Exercise Science15, 7 (August 2022), 1202–1211. doi:10.70252/OGQR5926

    2022 doi

  11. [19]

    Zhonglin Mu and Xiaofeng Wang. 2021. Applied Anatomy and Physiology of Ear. InPractical Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-7993-2_6

    2021 doi

  12. [20]

    Arshad Nasser, Kexin Zheng, and Kening Zhu. 2021. ThermEarhook: Investigat- ing Spatial Thermal Haptic Feedback on the Auricular Skin Area. InProceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction. ACM, Montréal QC Canada, 662–672. doi:10.1145/3462244.3479922

    2021

  13. [21]

    Samantha Newby, Wajira Mirihanage, and Anura Fernando. 2025. Body heat energy driven knitted thermoelectric garments with personal cooling.Applied Thermal Engineering258 (Jan. 2025), 124546. doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2024. 124546

    2025 doi

  14. [22]

    Pfaffenberger and James P

    Roger C. Pfaffenberger and James P. Patterson. 1987.Statistical Methods for Business and Economics(3rd ed.). Irwin, Homewood, IL

    1987

  15. [23]

    Tobias Röddiger, Christopher Clarke, Paula Breitling, Tim Schneegans, Haibin Zhao, Hans Gellersen, and Michael Beigl. 2022. Sensing with Earables: A System- atic Literature Review and Taxonomy of Phenomena.Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous ...

    2022 doi

  16. [24]

    Paradiso, Christopher Clarke, and Michael Beigl

    Tobias Röddiger, Michael Küttner, Philipp Lepold, Tobias King, Dennis Moschina, Oliver Bagge, Joseph A. Paradiso, Christopher Clarke, and Michael Beigl. 2025. OpenEarable 2.0: Open-Source Earphone Platform for Physiological Ear Sens- ing.Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, ...

    2025 doi

  17. [25]

    Schwambach, Óscar Hernández López, Michele Kremer Sott, Leonel Pablo Carvalho Tedesco, and Rolf Fredi Molz

    Gislene Cássia S. Schwambach, Óscar Hernández López, Michele Kremer Sott, Leonel Pablo Carvalho Tedesco, and Rolf Fredi Molz. 2022. Acceptance and per- ception of wearable technologies: A survey on Brazilian and European companies. Technology in Society68 (Feb. 2022), 101840. ...

    2022

  18. [26]

    Dennis Stanke, Tim Duente, Kerem Can Demir, and Michael Rohs. 2023. Can You Ear Me?: A Comparison of Different Private and Public Notification Channels for the Earlobe.Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies7, 3 (Sept. 2023), 1–23. d...

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    Boyang Sun, Jiansong Wu, Zhuqiang Hu, Ruotong Wang, Fei Gao, and Xiaofeng Hu. 2022. Human mood and cognitive function after different extreme cold exposure.International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics91 (Sept. 2022), 103336. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2022.103336

    2022

  20. [28]

    Yohei Tanaka and Lisa Gale. 2013. Beneficial Applications and Deleterious Effects of Near-Infrared from Biological and Medical Perspectives.Optics and Photonics Journal03, 04 (2013), 31–39. doi:10.4236/opj.2013.34A006

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    Nadine Von Frankenberg. 2021. Towards Resolving Thermal Comfort Conflicts in Shared Spaces. InExtended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1–5. doi:10.1145/3411763.3451512

    2021

  22. [30]

    Jenny von Platten. 2025. When past meets present: A mixed-methods study of heating practices in Sweden during the energy crisis.Energy Research and Social Science122 (2025), 104013. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2025.104013

    2025

  23. [31]

    Haiying Wang, Jie Wang, Wenyu Li, and Shuwei Liang. 2022. Experimental study on a radiant leg warmer to improve thermal comfort of office workers in winter. Building and Environment207 (Jan. 2022), 108461. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2021. 108461

    2022 doi

  24. [32]

    Hui Zhang, Edward Arens, and Yongchao Zhai. 2015. A review of the corrective power of personal comfort systems in non-neutral ambient environments.Build- ing and Environment91 (Sept. 2015), 15–41. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.03.013 Received 20 February 2007; revised 12 March 2...

    2015 doi

  25. [337]

    doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2023.01.010

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.