Page 75 - DP-2-1

Design+ Evaluating a building code app

interior design department. Most participants were females Figure 6 reveals that about 89% of participants agree
with ages ranging from 18 to 29. More than half of the or strongly agree that the Building Code Calculator
participants are White, with the remaining identifying as App helped them to remember and understand the
other racial groups or multiracial. Over half of participants building code’s content, while about 11% of participants
receive grade A+ or A, with 37% receiving A- or B+, while disagreed with these two statements. It also shows that
only 10% receiving grades below B+. all participants agree or strongly agree that the Building
About 89% of the participants strongly agreed/ Code Calculator App helped them to apply the building
agreed that understanding the building code should be code’s content. It also shows that about 68% of participants
important to interior designers and ensuring that interior agree or strongly agree that the Building Code Calculator
design solutions comply with the building code should App helped them to analyze the building code’s content.
be important to interior designers, while about 11% Figure 6 also reveals that about 74% of participants agree
strongly agreed with these two statements, as shown in or strongly agree that the Building Code Calculator App
Figure 3. Figure 4 shows the different levels of participants’ helped them to evaluate the building code’s content.
familiarity and experience with building code. Furthermore, it shows that about 89% of participants
agree or strongly agree that the Building Code Calculator
Figure 5 shows that all participants expressed that App helped them to create a new point of view based on
learning about building code in the interior design studio the building code’s content.
is extremely important or important.
Figure 7 shows that all participants agree or strongly
agree that the Building Code Calculator App enables
Table 2. Participants’ demographics (n=19)
them to accomplish their tasks more quickly (relative
Sample characteristics n % advantage), fits into their work style (compatibility),
Gender and is easy to use (complexity); the results of using the
Female 18 95 Building Code Calculator App are apparent to them (result
demonstrability); and they plan to use the Building Code
Male 1 5
Age Calculator App in the future.
Under 18 0 0 Participants’ perceptions of their stress levels as they
18 – 23 12 63 worked on the building code scenarios are captured in
Figure 8. About 26% of the participants indicated high or
24 – 29 6 32 extremely high levels of stress, while about 42% were neutral,
30 or older 1 5 and about 32% indicated low or extremely low levels of stress
Prefer not to answer 0 0 while working on the first building code exercise using the
Race traditional methods. About 32% of the participants indicated
American Indian or Alaska Native 2 11 high or extremely high levels of stress, while about 16% were
Asian 0 0 neutral, and about 52% indicated low or extremely low levels
African American 1 5 of stress while working on the first building code exercise
using the Building Code Calculator App. About 21% of the
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 0 0 participants indicated high or extremely high levels of stress,
White 13 68 while about 16% were neutral, and about 63% indicated low
Multiracial 2 11 or extremely low levels of stress while working on the first
Prefer to not answer 1 5 building code exercise using the Building Code Calculator
Grades App. Table 3 demonstrates the mean and standard deviation
A + or A 10 53 of stress levels for each phase, indicating a gradual decrease
A- or B+ 7 37 in stress levels as participants used the app and during the
B 1 5 second exercise.
B- or C+ 1 5 Table 3. Stress level mean and standard deviation
C, C-, or lower 0 0
Prefer not to answer 0 0 Phase Mean Standard deviation
Note: Participants who specified more than one race were placed in the Before using the app 2.95 0.97
multiracial category. One participant identified as African American While using the app 2.68 1.57
and American Indian. The other multiracial participants identified as
Asian and White. After using the app 2.53 1.22

Volume 2 Issue 1 (2025) 7 doi: 10.36922/dp.4730