Why does the researcher in the attached file had 2 different set of constructs to measure satisfaction and housing adequacy? When a house is adequate, doesn't it influence satisfaction too? Isn't better to have the same measurement for both?
As its mention on the paper, satisfaction is quite difficult to measure because it varies from a user to other. The house can be technically adequate but doesn´t satisfy the user because everyone has its own parameters. For that, you should prepare a test to ask the users.However, you can measure indoor environmental conditions and compare them with comfort levels in your Country and with the answers to the survey.
To measure air temperature and humidity you can acquire HOBO sensors, there are different models to fit your necessities, for this brand, you can also get sensors to measure air characteristics as VOC or CO2 levels. And to measure light you can use an LI-COR photometer or a FLUKE light meter. You should consider that it is important to know the outdoor conditions and the ideal parameters to compare with.
People's demands and expectations of the built environment defer from time to time, place to place, and from person to person. Therefore there is no way to measure it out exactly how desirable is a place or building. What we could do is to define criteria and indicators based on a philosophy (e.g. sustainability) and then measure things according to that. Other way is to use questionnaires and analyze what people think or how they feel, but we should take into account the fact that what people think they like is not necessarily what is good for planet, health or future.
Try a Galvanic Skin Response Meter - it gives a reasonable indication of the emotional response to the question 'are you satisfied with your current housing condition?'.You will need to calibrate the GSRM against pre-established conditions relating to satistaction/disatisfaction questions. Once you know a typical response to your query you can proceed