The psychological bias of organizational structures and reward systems as highlighted by the Hawthorne effect are clearly problematic for environmental research. Often hampered by a lack of time-based analysis, many theories are so entrenched in environmental research that they become part of an accepted wisdom among social scientists (Parsons, 1973). Economists John List and Steven Levitt have recently challenged this wisdom, stating that the production variance shown in the Hawthorne experiments can be attributed to other biochemically induced factors relating to work production and climate, confirming earlier studies by Steven Jones. While design research methods may vary (from questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and online surveys), cognitive rationalization is fundamentally the same, integrated by what neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga refers to as the Interpreter. Therefore, environmental researchers (and anyone else who depend on memory recall to make judgements) rarely operate left-brain rationale, forming ‘creative’ rationalizations from the same non-cognitive (irrational) areas of the brain which process emotions.

E.g., Why do many architects specify aeron chairs over other more appropriate somatic alternatives?  Regardless of personal taste, many would repond with something like, ‘I preferred the design’ or ‘they were within budget.’ Occaisionally, this response seems valid and the left-hemisphere rules. In the majority of cases however, the repsonse is impossible to explain, based solely on emotional instinct. The clear message here is that before environmental researchers consider what methodology to adopt, they need to be aware that responses given by subjects about their behavior will generally be skewed.

Levitt, S.D. & List, J.A. ‘Was there Really a Hawthorne Effect at the Hawthorne Plant? An Analysis of the Original Illumination Experiments.’ (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2009)

Parsons, H. M. ‘What happened at Hawthorne?’ (Science 183, 922-932, 1974) argued the Hawthorne effect was due to feedback-promoted learning.

Berkeley Rice, ‘The Hawthorne Defect: Persistence of a Flawed Theory’ (Psychology Today, 1982)