Review of 'Effect of lockdown on activities of daily living in built environment and well-being'

Author: Anna Mavrogianni

Review text

I would like to thank the authors for this is very interesting and timely study.

I have a few comments/suggestions:

· Abstract: ’most preferred to work from their bedroom’. I was wondering to what extent this is an actual choice given the multiple restrictions that might apply in some instances, especially in smaller or overcrowded homes.

“The general living conditions in Indian homes can broadly be categorized under active and passive zones. Activities related to watching TV, family interactions and daily chores of household are performed in living, dining and kitchen and are often noisy and are usually considered as active zones. The only livable spaces left are bedroom and balcony/sit-out which are relatively calmer and considered passive zones. Hence with no other choice left,WfHcould happen in bedrooms and sit-outs that are relatively calm and are sufficient considering the average size of 4-members in a family. Thus the job attending respondents’ preferred bedroom and educational institute attending respondents preferred balcony/sit-out (Figure 4). However, design of spaces that could accommodate the requirements of formal and calm environments for WfH is important during situations of “stay home stay safe”.

Figure 4: Percentage of number of bedroom and balcony/sit-out present in dwellings.

· I would have perhaps included the Aims in the Introduction rather than the Methods section.

Yes, it has been included in Introduction section.

“The twin aims of the study is to evaluate how activities of daily living (ADL) have a bearing on well-being during lockdown and how spaces at home support ADL during the “stay home stay safe” strategy.”

· I think that part of the results analysis could be slightly clearer. For instance: "There is significant positive relation with 95% confidence interval and R2=0.18 [...]" I would have interpreted such an R2 value as a weak correlation? This applies to other results too, such as the analysis of sleep patterns.

“While R2 of greater than 50% is considered significant, studies show that in sociological and psychological research low R2 do have relevance (Ref. 10 in paper) specifically considering the unprecedented situation that humankind encounters and volatile experience of the respondent to comprehend. The variables considered throw light on aspects that could be taken into account to find ways to live with situations like covid-19 pandemic. However, analysis of sleep pattern are omitted owing to a very weak correlation as suggested”

Ref. 10 in paper: Singh, A.K., Low R-squared values in multiple regression analysis? (2020). https://www.researchgate.net/post/Low_R-squared_values_in_multiple_regression_analysis/5f14e06e55a4926101753aa8.

· A more in-depth analysis of potential relationships between the characteristics of participating homes and wellbeing during the lockdown would have been very interesting.

The aim of the study is to assess Activities of Daily Living (ADL), whether existing built environments support ADL when all members stay home and overall well-being. During questionnaire design, striking the balance addressing all and keeping in view the respondent’s ease, specifically time and effort taken to fill the questionnaire online was challenging. However, following modification is made to explain the characteristics of participating home and wellbeing.

“Built environment and Work from Home (WfH): Of the 121 samples 62% of them own the residence, 37.2% stay in rented houses and 0.8% stay in quarters provided by the employer. The breakup of different types of residential buildings are Apartment/group housing (52.9%), Individual/independent houses (40.5%) and (6.6%) of Row housing. The generally available spaces for residential buildings in India are kitchen, living, dining, balcony or sit-out spaces, toilets/washrooms and with more than 90% of them having 1-4 bedrooms (11). The number of dwellings studied consisting of these spaces are shown in the figure with few having exclusive spaces viz. store space, home theatre, garage/parking, terrace and back/front yard (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Spaces in dwellings

We assessed the response of the participants on WfH and found that people whose homes are of group housing/apartment type have no significant relation. Those staying in individual houses (22 respondents) irrespective of the ownership prefer WfH from their bed room space (p<0.05 and R2=0.52) with 95% confidence interval (Table-3). As for the students, those who stay at their own houses (21 samples) prefer balcony/sit-out spaces to perform their activities (p<0.05 and R2=0.48 with 95% confidence interval). The general living conditions in Indian homes can broadly be categorized under active and passive zones. Activities related to watching TV, family interactions and daily chores of household are performed in active zones that include living, dining and kitchen and are often noisy. Hence the possibility of WfH with no other choice left could happen in bedrooms and sit-outs that are relatively calm and are sufficient in numbers considering the average size of 4-members in a family (Figure 4). However, design of spaces that could accommodate the requirements of formal and calm environments for WfH is important during situations of “stay home stay safe”.

Figure 4: Percentage of number of bedroom and balcony/sitout present in dwellings.