## 3 Results
### Experiment 1: Illuminance 300 Lux  
#### 3.1.1 Light Appearance  
For Q1, the main effect of the CRI (_F_ (1,94) = 6.703, \(p\) = 0.011) was significant (Figure 3a). The main effect of the CCT (_F_ (1,94) = 17.566, \(p\) < 0.001) was significant (Figure 3b).  
For Q2, the main effect of the CCT (_F_ (1,94) = 109.426, \(p\) < 0.001) was significant (Figure 4).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Category** & **Question** & **Response** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Main**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Two-Way**} \\ \hline  & & & **CRI** & **CCT** & **CRI \(\times\) CCT** \\ \hline Light appearance & Q1 & Dark-bright & 0.488 & 0.002 * & 0.866 \\  & Q2 & Cold–warm & 0.061 & 0.000 * & 0.077 \\ Spatial & Q3 & Dark-bright & 0.430 & 0.000 * & 0.923 \\ brightness & Q4 & Strongly disagree–strongly agree & 0.892 & 0.395 & 0.083 \\ Present comfort & Q5 & Uncomfortable–comfortable & 0.876 & 0.990 & 0.658 \\ Visual comfort & Q6 & Strongly disagree–strongly agree & 0.428 & 0.937 & 0.127 \\ Readability & Q7 & Difficult-easy & 0.591 & 0.422 & 0.595 \\  & Q8 & Strongly disagree–strongly agree & 0.746 & 0.365 & 0.314 \\ Satisfaction & Q9 & Unsatisfactory–satisfactory & 0.657 & 0.322 & 0.105 \\  & Q10 & Strongly disagree–strongly agree & 0.788 & 0.893 & 0.110 \\ Productivity & Q11 & Decreased–increased & 0.918 & 0.685 & 0.028 * \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Indicates significance at \(p\) < 0.05.  
\end{table}
Table 4: Statistical significance of the effects on evaluating the model for the questions in experiment 2.  
Figure 3: (a) Main effects of the CRI and (b) CCT on light appearance (Q1) in experiment 1.  
3.1.2. Brightness, Preference, Visual Comfort, Readability, Satisfaction, and Self-Reported Productivity  
**Brightness.** For Q3, a one-way ANOVA on the brightness perception revealed a significant effect of the CCT (\(F\) (1,94) = 14.074, \(p<0.001\)) (Figure 5a).  
**Preference.** For Q4, a two-way ANOVA showed that the interaction effect between the CRI and CCT for preference was significant (\(F\) (1,92) = 8.797, \(p=0.004\)) (Figure 5b).  
**Visual comfort.** For Q5, a two-way interaction between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 8.200, \(p=0.005\)) was significant (Figure 6a). A two-way interaction between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 5.706, \(p=0.019\)) was also significant for Q6 (Figure 6b).  
**Figure 4.** Main effect of the CCT on light appearance (Q2) in experiment 1.  
Figure 5. (**a**) Main effect of the CCT on brightness (Q3) and (**b**) interaction effect between the CRI and CCT for preference (Q4) in experiment 1.  
**Readability.** For Q7, a two-way interaction between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 3.208, \(p\) = 0.077) was marginally significant (Figure 7a). A two-way interaction between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 5.671, \(p\) = 0.019) was also significant for Q8 (Figure 7b).  
**Satisfaction.** For Q9, a two-way interaction between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 4.903, \(p\) = 0.029) was significant (Figure 8a). A two-way interaction between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 9.339, \(p\) = 0.003) was also significant for Q10 (Figure 8b).  
**Self-reported productivity.** For Q11, a two-way ANOVA on the self-reported productivity revealed a significant interaction effect between the CRI and CCT (\(F\) (1,92) = 9.894, \(p\) = 0.002) (Figure 9).