Showing papers on "Annoyance published in 1978"

Synthesis of social surveys on noise annoyance.

Abstract: Since noise was first recognized as a serious environmental pollutant, a number of social surveys have been conducted in order to assess the magnitude of the problem and to develop suitable noise ratings, such that, from a measurement of certain physical characteristics of community noise, one could reliably predict the community’s subjective response to the noise. Recently, the author has reviewed the data from social surveys concerning the noise of aircraft, street traffic, expressway traffic, and railroads. Going back to the original published data, the various survey noise ratings were translated to day–night average sound level, and an independent judgment was made, where choice was possible, as to which respondents should be counted as ’’highly annoyed.’’ The results of 11 of these surveys show a remarkable consistency. It is proposed that the average of these curves is the best currently available relationship for predicting community annoyance due to transportation noise of all kinds.

The effect of aircraft noise on the mental health of a community sample: a pilot study.

Abstract: Results of the investigation of a sample of size N = 200, half of whom live in the vicinity of a main airport, are reported. Three health indicators were examined: (1) annoyance reactions measured with a scale which did not include symptoms; (2) a symptom score, obtained with a screening instrument which identifies possible psychiatric cases; and (3) confirmed psychiatric cases identified with a traditional diagnosis after an interview by a psychiatrist. Noise was undoubtedly associated with annoyance. An association between noise and psychiatric measures was only present in a subgroup of respondents of high education. There was a marked association between annoyance and psychiatric measures. An attempt was made to clarify the nature of this relationship. Hypersensitivity to noise was associated with a high frequency of psychiatric symptoms and should be considered among the high risk factors for psychiatric illness.

Nationwide urban noise survey.

Abstract: Most current knowledge about community response to noise exposure is derived from studies of high‐level transportation sources. A nationwide urban noise survey was undertaken to study effects associated with more moderate but far more common sorts of noise exposure. Over 2000 respondents at 24 sites in seven cities of varying noise exposure and population density were interviewed by telephone and in person about their reactions to everyday noises. A brief but comprehensive structured questionnaire was based on direct questioning about annoyance and related effects. Among the major findings of the survey were widespread annoyance and speech interference from exposure to urban noise and strong relationships between the extent of annoyance and exposure level, speech interference, and population density.

Subjective annoyance from noise compared with some directly measurable effects.

Abstract: In epidemiological investigations of annoyance it is important to search for directly measurable effects that are associated with reports of annoyance. The relationship between reported experiences of annoyance, performance on an arithmetic test, and hormonal stress reactions was studied on 100 male students during acute exposure to 85 dB (A) of traffic noise in a laboratory setting. An association was demonstrated between reported feelings of annoyance, performance efficiency, and the subjects’ experience of the influence of noise on their performance. The exposure to noise was found to affect performance more negatively in the more annoyed-individuals. The results indicate that the annoyance inclined individuals in a community may constitute a special risk group that will suffer more from the adverse effects of community noise.

Traffic noise annoyance along urban roadways: report on a survey in brisbane, sydney and melbourne

Abstract: A survey of noise levels and noise annoyance was conducted along 19 urban and suburban roadways in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne. An average of 43 residents were surveyed along each roadway with a total sample of 818. Traffic volumes on the roadways ranged from 4000 to 57000 vehicle/ day. It was found that a succinct measure of the noise effects was provided by the residents self rated score on a simple seven point, annoyance scale. However no presently available noise level scale was found to correlate substantially with individual respondents' noise annoyance scores. It was confirmed that people with different noise annoyance susceptibilities had different responses to noise, but the hypothesis that different susceptibility groups had differently graded responses to increasing noise exposure was not supported. The best predictor of group annoyance scares was found to be the number of 'heavy vehicles', and this was felt to be a proxy measure of the number of 'noisy vehicles' using the roadway. (A)

Scaling loudness and annoyance as a function of duration

Abstract: Both loudness and annoyance depend—under some conditions—on duration, but in opposite ways. Some data suggest that the loudness of a continuous sound decreases over time, after the first second or so. Data and common observation suggest that the annoyance of a continuous sound increases over time. To catch these changing responses on the wing, we have applied a method of successive magnitude estimation. An observer hears a continuous sound to which he assigns a number whenever a 2‐s light appears. He is instructed to match a number either to the sound's loudness or to its annoyance. Results show that at low levels, as duration lengthens loudness decreases, more so for high‐frequency tones, less so for low‐frequency tones and wide‐band noise. At higher levels, loudness remains constant as a function of duration. On the other hand, annoyance grows markedly with duration—especially during the first 15 s—but its rate of growth and magnitude seem to depend on level, spectral characteristics, fluctuations, and ...

Growth function for human response to large‐amplitude impulse noise

Abstract: The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed the use of C‐weighted day/night level for the assessment of impulse noise such as the noise resulting from sonic boom, blast noise (artillery, armor, demolition, etc.) and other large‐amplitude impulse sources. One remaining question pertaining to the use of C‐weighting has been the growth function for human response to impulse noise. This question arises because work by Kryter and by Young using peak values and/or small amplitudes exhibited growth functions of 6−7dB for a doubling of annoyance, while the growth function for human response to common sources (planes, vehicles, etc.) increases by about 10 dB for a doubling of annoyance. Kyter’s and Young’s data are reanalyzed herein by using C‐weighting and by including only large‐amplitude data. This reanalysis results in a growth function for human response to impulse noise which increases by about 10 dB for a doubling of annoyance. This equality of growth function between common A‐weighted noise and ...

South east freeway (Brisbane) noise annoyance study: report on survey

Abstract: A survey was conducted of people living near a 2 km length of the south east freeway, Brisbane, to examine the effects of freeway traffic noise. The observed magnitude and spatial distribution of residents' noise annoyance, together with the distribution of the effects of traffic noise on household activities, has been reported in brown and law (1976). The present report describes the questionnaire used in the survey and tabulates all survey results not previously reported, including study area social data and housing characteristics. The report examines residents' perception and assessment of traffic noise in the neighbourhood context. Residents' pattern of sleep and absence from the home are reported, indicating their daily exposure to study area noise. This is examined in relation to residents' perception of the daily variation in the noticeability of noise. Responses to a scale used to assess individual susceptibility to noise annoyance are also examined. (A)

Annoyance response to recorded aircraft noise. I. Effect of intensity of illumination.

Abstract: Normal-hearing adults aged 19--49 yrs watched TV in a simulated living room and made magnitude estimations of the annoyance of each of 27 levels of noise from 83.9 to 91.8 dbA. Each item was a simulated flyover of an aircraft presented from 4 loudspeakers each outside one of the upper corners of the room. The 27 items were all presented in each of 3 sessions (counterbalanced across groups of 4 S) under room illumination of 21.53 lumens/sg m (i.e., "normal" room illumination), and 2.69 ("dim") and 129.17 ("bright") illumination. Split-half reliabilities indicated that Ss can make reliable responses in these conditions. The intercept of the regression lines of annoyance on noise levels significantly differed, and the slopes tended to differ, among the illumination conditions; indicating that the annoyance may grow more rapidly with increasing noise level under dim than normal illumination. Data predicted that annoyance reduction, which may be equivalent to 5 db attenuation, is obtained when normal illumination is reduced to dim. Similarly, judged annoyance tended to differ between bright and normal illumination. Language: en

Loudness and annoyance of single and combined community noises

Abstract: The contribution of type and levels of community noises to the perception of loudness, noisiness, and annoyance is being explored in ongoing research projects. Particular attention has been given to the relationship between scaling method and the conclusions it is possible to draw from the data, especially with regard to observers' abilities to differentiate noises according to the above attributes. Procedures for calibrating and possibly standardizing the perceptual scales have been attempted with preliminary success. Various types of noises have been investigated: aircraft noise under different flying conditions, traffic noise, and a number of other community noises. Besides specific scaling problems, the investigations have addressed the specific problems of observers' abilities to differentiate among noises that are combined in a complex setting as well as their ability to integrate various noises into a unitary perception of loudness and annoyance. Since the experimental setups reflect real‐life situations, the answers to these latter questions are relevant to understanding the responses of the individual who is exposed to combinations of noises in his or her community.The contribution of type and levels of community noises to the perception of loudness, noisiness, and annoyance is being explored in ongoing research projects. Particular attention has been given to the relationship between scaling method and the conclusions it is possible to draw from the data, especially with regard to observers' abilities to differentiate noises according to the above attributes. Procedures for calibrating and possibly standardizing the perceptual scales have been attempted with preliminary success. Various types of noises have been investigated: aircraft noise under different flying conditions, traffic noise, and a number of other community noises. Besides specific scaling problems, the investigations have addressed the specific problems of observers' abilities to differentiate among noises that are combined in a complex setting as well as their ability to integrate various noises into a unitary perception of loudness and annoyance. Since the experimental setups reflect real‐life situ...

The annoyance of sound and of other life events

Abstract: Scaling annoyance is different from scaling loudness. The exponent of the annoyance function is more labile than the exponent of the loudness function. However, there is a general truth: If one physical parameter is varied then subjects will use those variations to represent values of the dimension they are asked to respond to. This clearly induces correlations between things like annoyance and loudness.They can only be untangled when annoyance judgments vary, as with spectral differences, but loudness does not. Not only are scales of annoyance different from perceptual scales, the notion of “annoyance” derives from a social response to noise. Community response is commonly represented by proportions of respondents replying to partition scale descriptors. Evidence that community annoyance is not represented by such frequency tables is shown by the discrepancy between survey response data for attitudes toward the Concorde, and the annoyance scales for aircraft overflight sounds based on a utility comparison scale (cross‐modality matching). These data demonstrate that although everyone in a community may report that they are annoyed by the sounds of aircraft overflights, the magnitude of the annoyance is neither uniform across individuals, nor is it reflected in the proportions of annoyed people in the community. [Work supported by NASA.]

Traffic noise measurements and their relation with annoyance

Abstract: The paper reports on part of a large scale traffic noise survey in two Belgian cities: Antwerp and Brussels. Continuous 24-hour measurements are done at 40 places in Antwerp, while the total observation periods at 25 places in Brussels are reduced to 12 hours. The measurement sites cover the whole range from very quiet places to very noisy, and they present mainly free flowing traffic conditions. In order to study the effect of parameters which influence the sound level, series of additional measurements are simultaneously executed, e.g. in respect with street width, street height, ground cover, traffic lights, etc. For fluctuating noises, such as traffic noise, the only way to have an idea about annoyance by traffic noise is to do enquiries. In Antwerp about 1300 inhabitants are interviewed, and in Brussels 500.

Annoyance and acceptability judgments produced by 32 aircraft noise conditions

Abstract: The varying effects of aircraft noise and human response variables on annoyance responses were measured in a major laboratory study of 384 subjects. About half of all variance in annoyance is explained by level and spectrum of noise, type of subject's activity, and real environment exposures. Level of noise accounts for 30% of all variance and 60% of all explained variance. Type of subject's activity accounts for 12% and his type of real environment exposure accounts for 8% of explained variance. Annoyance under TV viewing and listening was greater than under rest and relaxation. Residents normally exposed to lower levels of aircraft noise were more annoyed by noise than residents living closer to the airport and regularly exposed to higher noise levels. The correlation between Leq and 1536 annoyance judgments was r = 0.53, with each unit of annoyance on a 0–9 scale associated with 6.25 units of Leq. One experimental condition which included full retrofit of 747s and 727s and replacement of noisy 707s by ...

Quantitative Studies of Traffic Noise Annoyance

Abstract: This paper describes a continuing research program on traffic noise annoyance. The work involves a combination of laboratory, field, and computer modeling studies. Results are intended to provide a better fundamental understanding of noise-induced annoyance. Potential applications include the evaluation of various vehicle noise reduction programs.