Showing papers on "Annoyance published in 2022"

Balanced Approach to Aircraft Noise Management

Abstract: Abstract ICAO Balanced Approach (BA) to aircraft noise management in airports is reviewed in accordance with historical and technological challenges. All four basic elements of the BA are subject to noise exposure control with dominant emphasis on reduction of noise at source and compatible land usage inside the noise zoning around the airports. Noise abatement procedures and flight restrictions are used at any airport due to its specific issues and should be implemented on a basis of cost–benefit analysis. Noise exposure reduction is an intermediate goal, a final goal—to reduce noise impact, which is mostly represented by population annoyance as a reaction to noise exposure, is discussed also.

Learning in Noisy Classrooms: Children’s Reports of Annoyance and Distraction from Noise are Associated with Individual Differences in Mind-Wandering and Switching skills:

Abstract: Classrooms are noisy, yet little is known about pupils’ subjective reactions to noise. We surveyed 112 children between 8.70 and 11.38 years of age and extracted five dimensions in their reactions ...

Association between Noise Annoyance and Mental Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract: To date, most studies of noise and mental health have focused on noise exposure rather than noise annoyance. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether the available evidence supports an adverse association between noise annoyance and mental health problems in people. We carried out a literature search of Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and conference proceedings published between 2000 and 2022. Thirteen papers met the inclusion criteria. We conducted meta-analyses of noise annoyance in relation to depression, anxiety, and general mental health. In the meta-analyses, we found that depression was approximately 1.23 times greater in those who were highly noise-annoyed (N = 8 studies). We found an approximately 55% higher risk of anxiety (N = 6) in highly noise-annoyed people. For general mental health (N = 5), highly annoyed participants had an almost 119% increased risk of mental health problems as assessed by Short Form (SF) or General Household Questionnaires (GHQ), but with high heterogeneity and risk of publication bias. In conclusion, findings are suggestive of a potential link between noise annoyance and poorer mental health based on a small number of studies. More evidence is needed to confirm these findings.

Noise complaint patterns in New York City from January 2010 through February 2021: Socioeconomic disparities and COVID-19 exacerbations

Abstract: Excessive environmental noise exposure and noise annoyance have been linked to adverse physical and mental health outcomes. Although socioeconomic disparities in acoustically measured and geospatially estimated noise have been established, less is known about disparities in noise complaints, one of the most common sources of distress reported to local municipalities. Furthermore, although some studies have posited urban quieting during the COVID-19 pandemic, little empirical work has probed this and probed noise complaints during the pandemic.Using over 4 million noise complaints from the New York City (NYC) 311 database, we quantified census tract-level socioeconomic disparities in noise complaints since 2010 and examined how such disparities changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.Using data from January 2010 through February 2020, we fit linear mixed-effects models, estimating monthly tract-level noise complaints by the proportion of residents who were low-income, time in months since January 2010, categorical month, their interactions, and potential confounds, such as total population and population density. To estimate COVID-19 pandemic effects, we included additional data from March 2020 through February 2021 and additional interactions between proportion low-income, month of year, and an indicator variable for COVID-19 pandemic onset in March 2020.Census tracts with a higher proportion of low-income residents reported more monthly noise complaints and this increased over time (time × month × proportion low-income interaction p-values < .0001 for all months), particularly in warmer months. Socioeconomic disparities in noise complaints were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic (month × proportion low-income × pandemic era interaction p-values < .0001 for March through November), also in a seasonal manner.Since 2010, noise complaints have increased the most in the most economically distressed communities, particularly in warmer seasons. This disparity was particularly exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, contrary to some theories of urban quieting. Community-based interventions to ameliorate noise and noise annoyance, both public health hazards, are needed in underserved communities.

Annoyance due to residential road traffic and aircraft noise: Empirical evidence from two European cities

Abstract: Based on a study in two European cities, Mainz in Germany and Zurich in Switzerland, the article investigates both acoustical and non-acoustical factors affecting indoor annoyance due to residential road traffic and aircraft noise. We specifically focus on three factors: (1) the role of windows as a feature of the building where people live; (2) the role of individual environmental concern as a general attitude; and (3) the role of household income as an indicator of socioeconomic resources. Empirical results show that closed windows in general and closed high-quality windows in particular are an important barrier against outdoor road traffic and aircraft noise, as well as a helpful subjective coping tool against corresponding annoyances. Environmental concern, too, proves to be a significant predictor of noise annoyance. Environmentally highly concerned people articulate feelings of annoyance more often than environmentally less concerned ones. As expected income is negatively related to road traffic noise annoyance. However, we find a positive association of income with annoyance from aircraft noise. Although objective exposure to aircraft noise is lower for high-income households, they feel stronger annoyed by noise from airplanes. Income shows various indirect effects on noise annoyance. A comparative analysis of road traffic and aircraft noise annoyance yields similarities, but also remarkable differences in terms of their influence factors.

Psychoacoustic modelling of rotor noise.

Abstract: The aviation sector is rapidly evolving with more electric propulsion systems and a variety of new technologies of vertical take-off and landing manned and unmanned aerial vehicles. Community noise impact is one of the main barriers for the wider adoption of these new vehicles. Within the framework of a perception-driven engineering approach, this paper investigates the relationship between sound quality and first order physical parameters in rotor systems to aid design. Three case studies are considered: (i) contra-rotating versus single rotor systems, (ii) varying blade diameter and thrust in both contra-rotating and single rotor systems, and (iii) varying rotor-rotor axial spacing in contra-rotating systems. The outcomes of a listening experiment, where participants assessed a series of sound stimuli with varying design parameters, allow a better understanding of the annoyance induced by rotor noise. Further to this, a psychoacoustic annoyance model optimised for rotor noise has been formulated. The model includes a novel psychoacoustic function to account for the perceptual effect of impulsiveness. The significance of the proposed model lies in the quantification of the effects of psychoacoustic factors, such as loudness as the dominant factor, and also tonality, high frequency content, temporal fluctuations, and impulsiveness on rotor noise annoyance.

A comparison of self-reported health status and perceptual responses toward environmental noise in rural, suburban, and urban regions in Canada.

Abstract: Health Canada, in collaboration with Advanis, conducted the Canadian Perspectives on Environmental Noise Survey (CPENS) to investigate expectations and attitudes toward environmental noise in rural and non-rural Canada. The CPENS, a 26-item questionnaire, was completed online by 6647 randomly selected Canadians, age 18 y and older between April and May 2021. The prevalence of reporting their area as often or always calm, quiet, and relaxing was 76.8%, 64%, and 48.4% in rural/remote, suburban, and urban, respectively. A high expectation of quiet was less prevalent yet followed the same pattern: rural/remote (58.2%), suburban (37.4%), and urban (21.8%). Self-reported health status and noise sensitivity were unrelated to geographic region. A high magnitude of non-specific sleep disturbance over the previous 12 months was reported by 7.8% overall; highest among urban dwellers (9.8%), followed by suburban (7.2%) and rural/remote (5.5%) dwellers (p < 0.01). High annoyance toward road traffic noise was 8.5% overall, and significantly higher in urban (10.5%), relative to suburban (7.9%) and rural/remote (6.6%) areas (p < 0.0001). Annoyance toward noise from rail, aircraft, mining, industry, marine activity, construction, wind turbines, and landscaping equipment is reported. The analysis also explores potential differences between Indigenous Peoples of Canada and non-Indigenous Canadians in their attitudes and expectations toward environmental noise.

Sound Tolerance Conditions (Hyperacusis, Misophonia, Noise Sensitivity, and Phonophobia): Definitions and Clinical Management

Abstract: Purpose: For some people, exposure to everyday sounds presents a significant problem. The purpose of this tutorial was to define and differentiate between the various sound tolerance conditions and to review some options for their clinical management.We informally reviewed the literature regarding sound tolerance conditions. The terminology and definitions provided are mostly consistent with how these terms are defined. However, many inconsistencies are noted. Methods of assessment and treatment also differ, and different methodologies are briefly described.Hyperacusis describes physical discomfort or pain when any sound reaches a certain level of loudness that would be tolerable for most people. Misophonia refers to intense emotional reactions to certain sounds (often body sounds such as chewing and sniffing) that are not influenced by the perceived loudness of those sounds. Noise sensitivity refers to increased reactivity to sounds that may include general discomfort (annoyance or feeling overwhelmed) due to a perceived noisy environment, regardless of its loudness. Phonophobia, as addressed in the audiology profession, describes anticipatory fear of sound. Phonophobia is an emotional response such as anxiety and avoidance of sound due to the "fear" that sound(s) may occur that will cause a comorbid condition to get worse (e.g., tinnitus) or the sound itself will result in discomfort or pain. (Note that phonophobia is a term used by neurologists to describe "migraineur phonophobia"-a different condition not addressed herein.) Conclusions: The literature addresses sound tolerance conditions but reveals many inconsistencies, indicating lack of consensus in the field. When doing an assessment for decreased sound tolerance, it is important to define any terms used so that the patient and all health care professionals involved in the care of the patient are aligned with the goals of the treatment plan. Treatment generally involves gradual and systematic sound desensitization and counseling.https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20164130.

Exposure–Response Functions for the Effects of Traffic Noise on Self-Reported Annoyance and Sleep Disturbance in Finland: Effect of Exposure Estimation Method

Abstract: Large variations in transportation noise tolerance have been reported between communities. In addition to population sensitivity, exposure–response functions (ERFs) for the effects of transportation noise depend on the exposure estimation method used. In the EU, the new CNOSSOS-EU method will change the estimations of exposure by changing the assignment of noise levels and populations to buildings. This method was officially used for the first time in the strategic noise mapping performed by Finnish authorities in 2017. Compared to the old method, the number of people exposed to traffic noise above 55 dB decreased by 50%. The main aim of this study, conducted in the Helsinki Capital Region, Finland, was to evaluate how the exposure estimation method affects ERFs for road traffic noise. As an example, with a façade road traffic noise level of 65 dB, the ERF based on the highest façade noise level of the residential building resulted in 5.1% being highly annoyed (HAV), while the ERF based on the exposure estimation method that is similar to the CNOSSOS-EU method resulted in 13.6%. Thus, the substantial increase in the health effect estimate compensates for the reduction in the number of highly exposed people. This demonstrates the need for purpose–fitted ERFs when the CNOSSOS-EU method is used to estimate exposure in the health impact assessment of transportation noise.

Health impact assessment of transportation noise in two Estonian cities

Abstract: Transportation noise is a growing public health concern worldwide, especially in urban areas, causing annoyance, sleep disturbance, cardiovascular diseases and other health effects. Recently, European Commission (EC) has developed a mutual methodology for assessing health impacts of transportation noise in European Union using strategic noise mapping. Applying this methodology, our aim was to quantify the health effects of road, rail and aircraft noise in two Estonian cities, Tallinn and Tartu. We also aimed to assess sensitivity of this methodology, while implementing lower threshold values and employing additional health outcomes. The proportion of highly annoyed residents due to road traffic noise was 11.6% in Tallinn, and 9.2% in Tartu; around 2.5% residents in both cities could have high sleeping disturbances. As exposure to railway and aircraft noise was relatively low in both cities, people with high annoyance and high sleep disturbance caused by railway and aircraft noise was below 1%. Ischemic heart disease (IHD) cases attributable to road traffic noise was estimated to be 122.6 in Tallinn and 21.5 in Tartu. Altogether transportation noise was estimated to cause 1807 disability adjusted life years (DALYs) in Tallinn and 370 DALYs in Tartu. The health costs were calculated as €126.5 and €25.9 million annually, respectively in the two cities. When we included higher number of health outcomes (stroke incidence, IHD deaths) and lowered exposure threshold by 5 dB, the annual burden of disease was doubled. As the latest epidemiological studies showed transportation noise having larger number of effects on lower noise levels, the results with the currently applied European Commission health impact assessment (HIA) methodology were rather conservative. Despite of uncertainties associated to applied methodology, transportation noise, especially road traffic noise, is an important environmental risk factor, that leads to considerable loss of healthy life years and causes large health costs in urban areas.

Health effects of wind turbine noise and road traffic noise on people living near wind turbines

Abstract: Very few surveys have investigated the health effects of both wind farms and road traffic so that the public health effects of environmental stressors are broadly understood. This case-control study examined the influences of both wind turbine noise and road traffic noise on self-reported symptoms and diseases close to wind turbines and in a control area. Wind turbine sound levels 17–39 dB LAeq met new national regulation (40 dB). Daytime road traffic noise levels were 32.5–63.5 dB, sometimes exceeding the regulation (55 dB). Altogether 676 residents responded to a masked living environment questionnaire. Higher wind turbine sound level was only associated with more likely reporting wind turbine noise annoyance and not with reporting of other symptoms or chronic diseases. On the other hand, higher road traffic sound level was associated with increased odds for road traffic noise annoyance, migraine or headache, dizziness, impaired hearing, pressure in ears, tachycardia or heart palpitations, and heart disease. Road traffic exposure seems to deserve attention especially if daytime levels exceed 55 dB. The health effects of wind farms seem to be limited to noise annoyance in areas where all residents are exposed to sound levels under 40 dB.

Influencing Factors Identification and Prediction of Noise Annoyance—A Case Study on Substation Noise

Abstract: Noise-induced annoyance is one person’s individual adverse reaction to noise. Noise annoyance is an important basis for determining the acceptability of environmental noise exposure and for formulating environmental noise standards. It is influenced by both acoustic and non-acoustic factors. To identify non-acoustic factors significantly influencing noise annoyance, 40 noise samples with a loudness level of 60–90 phon from 500–1000 kV substations were selected in this study. A total of 246 subjects were recruited randomly. Using the assessment scale of noise annoyance specified by ISO 15666-2021, listening tests were conducted. Meanwhile, basic information and noise sensitivity of each subject were obtained through a questionnaire and the Weinstein’s noise sensitivity scale. Based on the five non-acoustic indices which were identified in this study and had a significant influence on noise annoyance, a prediction model of annoyance from substation noise was proposed by a stepwise regression. Results showed that the influence weight of acoustic indices in the model accounted for 80% in which the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level and the sound pressure level above 1/1 octave band of 125 Hz were 65% and 15%, respectively. The influence weight of non-acoustic indices entering the model was 20% in which age, education level, noise sensitivity, income, and noisy degree in the workplace were 8%, 2%, 4%, 4%, and 2%, respectively. The result of this study can provide a basis for factors identification and prediction of noise annoyance.

In the shadow of wind energy: Predicting community exposure and annoyance to wind turbine shadow flicker in the United States

Abstract: The moving shadows caused by wind turbines, referred to as “shadow flicker” (“SF”), are known to generate annoyance in a subset of the exposed population. However, the relationship between the level of modeled SF exposure and the population's perceived SF and SF annoyance is poorly understood. Improved understanding of SF exposure impacts could provide a basis for exposure thresholds and, in turn, potentially improve community acceptance of and experience with wind power projects. This study modeled SF exposure at nearly 35,000 residences across 61 wind projects in the United States, 747 of which were also survey respondents. Using these results, we analyzed the factors that led to perceived SF and self-reported SF annoyance. We found that perceived SF is primarily an objective response to SF exposure, distance to the closest turbine, and whether the respondent moved in after the wind project was built. Conversely, SF annoyance was not significantly correlated with SF exposure. Rather, SF annoyance is primarily a subjective response to wind turbine aesthetics, annoyance to other anthropogenic sounds, level of education, and age of the respondent. We also examined regulations governing SF in the sample project areas and compared them to SF exposure in the surrounding population. Additionally, we found that noise limits could serve as a proxy for SF exposure, as 90% of those exposed to wind turbine sound of no more than 45 dBA L1h had SF exposure of less than 8 h per year (a prototypical EU regulatory threshold).

Does the Macro-Temporal Pattern of Road Traffic Noise Affect Noise Annoyance and Cognitive Performance?

Abstract: Noise annoyance is usually estimated based on time-averaged noise metrics. However, such metrics ignore other potentially important acoustic characteristics, in particular the macro-temporal pattern of sounds as constituted by quiet periods (noise breaks). Little is known to date about its effect on noise annoyance and cognitive performance, e.g., during work. This study investigated how the macro-temporal pattern of road traffic noise affects short-term noise annoyance and cognitive performance in an attention-based task. In two laboratory experiments, participants worked on the Stroop task, in which performance relies predominantly on attentional functions, while being exposed to different road traffic noise scenarios. These were systematically varied in macro-temporal pattern regarding break duration and distribution (regular, irregular), and played back with moderate LAeq of 42–45 dB(A). Noise annoyance ratings were collected after each scenario. Annoyance was found to vary with the macro-temporal pattern: It decreased with increasing total duration of quiet periods. Further, shorter but more regular breaks were somewhat less annoying than longer but irregular breaks. Since Stroop task performance did not systematically vary with different noise scenarios, differences in annoyance are not moderated by experiencing worsened performance but can be attributed to differences in the macro-temporal pattern of road traffic noise.