While there are a number of guidelines used throughout the world in the assessment of acceptability of tall building accelerations, none are based on systematically conducted surveys of occupant reaction to wind-induced motion. In this study, occupant response data were gathered by both a self-reporting mechanism and by interviewer-conducted surveys in control tower structures over a period of four years. These two approaches were designed in conjunction with experimental psychologists to ensure unbiased reporting. The data allowed analysis of perception thresholds and tolerability at different building frequencies and in different wind climates. The long-term nature of the studies also allowed an investigation of the causes and effects of adaptation to building motion. As the surveys were designed to allow multiple use during single storms, the effects of exposure duration were investigated. A final exit survey was conducted at the primary survey location to investigate views of the acceptability of wind-induced motion and the factors underlying these views. The findings of the field studies indicate that none of the currently used acceleration guidelines address all of the factors that contribute to occupant dissatisfaction. An alternative framework for assessing acceleration acceptability is proposed.