Topic
Annoyance
About: Annoyance is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2015 publications have been published within this topic receiving 38300 citations. The topic is also known as: annoy.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: The result showed that noise exposure level and noise sensitivity simultaneously affect noise annoyance, and noiseensitivity has a relatively larger impact on noise annoyance.
Abstract: Environmental noise is known to cause noise annoyance. Since noise annoyance is a subjective indicator, other mediators—such as noise sensitivity—may influence its perception. However, few studies have thus far been conducted on noise annoyance in South Korea that consider noise sensitivity and noise level simultaneously. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlations between noise sensitivity or noise level and noise annoyance on a large scale in South Korea. This study estimated the level of noise exposure based on a noise map created in 2014; identified and surveyed 1836 subjects using a questionnaire; and assessed the impact of transportation noise and noise sensitivity on noise annoyance. The result showed that noise exposure level and noise sensitivity simultaneously affect noise annoyance, and noise sensitivity has a relatively larger impact on noise annoyance. In conclusion, when study subjects were exposed to a similar level of noise, the level of noise annoyance differed depending on the noise sensitivity of the individual.
26 citations
01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: The aim of the study was to evaluate the residents' willingness to pay (WTP) for a public programme that would eliminate noise annoyance at home, and the estimation of the benefits of a programme that eliminates noise annoyance along main roads.
Abstract: This paper presents the results of a contingent valuation (CV) survey of 331 households living along highways and motorways in France (Rhone-Alpes region). The aim of the study was to evaluate the residents' willingness to pay (WTP) for a public programme that would eliminate noise annoyance at home. 82 % of the residents interviewed supported the programme, but only 38 % accepted to pay more local taxes for the reduction of noise. 47 % of the residents who did not accept to pay for the programme consider that they already pay a high amount of taxes; 16 % considered polluters should have to pay but not the residents. The mean WTP per household and per year was estimated to 73 Euros. Furthermore, for those who accepted to pay, WTP depends largely on the level of annoyance (47 to 130 Euros), to a lesser extent on the income level as well as on local taxes level, but not on traffic noise exposure. KEY ISSUES Road traffic noise can be regarded as having a major environmental impact, particularly on residential areas. Its cost could represent close to 0.5 % of GDP in the European Union [1]. Large sums of money are spent every year by the community to prevent or limit traffic noise, through national or local noise abatement programmes. An obvious question is whether the social benefits of such programmes can justify these large sums as the financial resources of the community are limited. For the economist, this basic issue raises a major problem: how can noise annoyance be valued. Valuing benefits is almost always based on the willingness to pay concept. WTP sometimes reflects the awareness of individuals of noise effects, and sometimes, the amount of money that the community or individuals will agree to pay to reduce or prevent noise annoyance. The contingent valuation (CV) method is one of the most common techniques used to estimate the WTP of individuals for an improvement of their noise environment [2, 3, 4]. This paper reports the results of a recent contingent valuation survey carried out in France whose objective was the estimation of the benefits of a programme that eliminates noise annoyance along main roads.
26 citations
TL;DR: This paper argues that if the federal government is to successfully protect the public from the adverse effects of environmental noise, its policies will need to be informed by a scientific understanding of the psychological and social factors that determine when noise results in annoyance and when noise may affect health as an environmental stressor.
Abstract: This paper argues that if the federal government is to successfully protect the public from the adverse effects of environmental noise, its policies will need to be informed by a scientific understanding of the psychological and social factors that determine when noise results in annoyance and when noise may affect health as an environmental stressor. The overreliance of federal agencies on mathematical modeling of average group responses to physical noise levels is discussed as oversimplifying and limiting the understanding of noise effects in crucial ways. The development of a more sophisticated information base is related to policy needs, such as the need to make accurate predictions about the annoyance of particular communities, the need to understand relationships between public participation in noise abatement efforts and annoyance, and the need to identify populations that may be susceptible to stress-related health effects.
26 citations
TL;DR: Findings in the present study confirm findings in the small number of available studies to date suggesting adverse health effects associated with aircraft noise annoyance and noise sensitivity and indicate possible modifier effects in the relationship between aircraft noise levels and the risk of hypertension.
26 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the annoyance of intruding noises in video games was measured by asking participants to indicate when intruding sounds of varying detectability were noticed in the presence of background noise.
26 citations