Individual differences in sensitivity to traffic noise: An empirical study

Repeated interview surveys were made in surburban residential areas of London and Liverpool. In both cities two sites were selected according to the noise exposure level (70 or 80 dB(A) 18 hour L₁₀, 1 metre from dwelling facade). The characteristics of the neighbourhoods were similar in all other relevant respects. The initial sample size obtained was 413 which was reduced by 21% when the interviews were repeated. Questions included noise dissatisfaction semantic differential scales, sensitivity to noise scales, environmental sensitivity scales, and classificatory questions. Two smaller random samples of 25 respondents selected from each of the noisy sites were also given two personality tests. It was found that (a) there was no evidence to suggest that the noise annoyance distributions were not normal—more specifically, they did not appear to be bimodal; (b) retest correlation coefficients were low but significant, indicating acceptable reliability of the noise dissatisfaction scale; (c) the reliability of the self-rating noise sensitivity scale was also found to be low but significant; (d) no personality factor was found to relate to annoyance or sensitivity to noise in a consistent manner. A general conclusion drawn was that noise dissatisfaction variation is due more to randomness in response to the measuring instrument than to individual differences in sensitivity to noise.     

Annoyance with aircraft noise in local recreational areas and the recreationists' noise situation at home

Few socioacoustic studies have examined the effect of noise on outdoor recreationists. Most studies concentrate on one setting of the everyday life of a noise-exposed population, which mainly has been the residential setting. This article relates annoyance with aircraft noise in outdoor recreational areas to the recreationists' noise situation at home. In conjunction with the relocation of the main airport of Norway in 1998, field studies were conducted before and after the change in one area near the old airport (1930 survey respondents), and one area near the new airport (1001 survey respondents). Multivariate linear regression analyses of the relationship between annoyance and aircraft noise exposure (LAeq for the aircraft events) in the recreational areas were conducted, controlled for noise annoyance at home, or aircraft noise exposure at home, the situation (before/ after the change), context- and demographic variables. People more highly annoyed at home tended to be more annoyed than others while in the recreational areas. A significant effect of aircraft noise exposure at home on annoyance in the recreational setting was not found. More research is warranted regarding the relationship between noise exposure at home and outdoor recreational demands.     

Standardized noise annoyance scales in Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese

Internationally standardized annoyance scales are required in order to compare community responses to environmental noises measured in various linguistic regions. ICBEN Team 6 organized an international joint study to establish standardized noise annoyance scales and has developed scales and questions in nine linguistic regions. With the exception of Japan, all of these regions were Euro-American. Thus, it has been necessary to augment the original ICBEN study by utilizing the ICBEN method to construct noise annoyance scales for use in other Asian countries, because noise pollution is becoming an increasingly important environmental issue in these countries. Also, Asian data should be compared internationally with Euro-American data. The present study reports on the use of the ICBEN method to construct annoyance scales in Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese.     

Laboratory annoyance and different traffic noise sources

The acute annoyance reaction to different noise sources (lorries, aircraft, mopeds and trains) was investigated in a laboratory experiment. Students were exposed to different noise climates at noise levels 70 and 80 dB(A) for 25 minutes, and their reactions were subsequently assessed by using a questionnaire. Their general sensitivity to noise was also evaluated. The results demonstrated that L_eq gave the best correlation with annoyance. However, lorry noise was found to be less disturbing than aircraft noise at the same L_eq value. This was more pronounced if the different noises were compared at equal peak dB(A) levels. The results suggest that other factors such as the irregularity of the noise or the individual experience of the noise are of importance for the annoyance reaction. A relationship was found between the general annoyance score and annoyance reactions in the laboratory. Questionnaires could thus be a suitable tool for identifying noise sensitive persons.     

Transportation noise annoyance: Testing of a probabilistic model

This analysis extends the development and testing of a probabilistic model of noise annoyance proposed in an earlier paper [1]. In the model, noise, measured as the level and number of specific events, leads to annoyance through its interference with activities. Testing of the model is based on noise and survey data collected at 56 sites around Toronto International Airport. Logit analysis is used to estimate equations to predict the probabilities of activity interference and annoyance due to road traffic noise and aircraft noise at each site. From these equations, probabilities of high annoyance are predicted and are compared with the proportion of respondents at each site reporting being highly annoyed. For this comparison, the sites are grouped on the basis of having the same 24 hour L_eq. Both predicted and reported annoyance values are consistently higher for aircraft noise than for road traffic noise at the same 24 hour L_eq. The results support the underlying argument of the model that previously reported source differences in dose-response relationships can be explained by using a model based on single event rather than daily average noise measures.     

Community responses to road traffic noise in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City

Vietnam is a developing country in southeast Asia, and its environment has been seriously affected by industrialization and urbanization. In large cities like Hanoi (northern Vietnam) and Ho Chi Minh City (southern Vietnam), noise emission from road traffic has been found to be a serious concern among general public. In 2005 and 2007, two large-scale socio-acoustic surveys of community response to road traffic noise were conducted to investigate human reactions to road traffic noise in these cities; the sample sizes were 1503 people in Hanoi and 1471 in Ho Chi Minh City. The noise exposure levels (L_den) were 70–83 dB in Hanoi and 75–83 dB in Ho Chi Minh City. Noise annoyance was estimated using standardized annoyance scales. For both cities, dose–response relationships were established between L_den and the percentage of highly annoyed respondents. Compared to annoyance responses of European people, Vietnamese were less annoyed by road traffic noise by about 5 dB. Hanoi respondents seemed to be more annoyed by noise than Ho Chi Minh City respondents. Conversation and sleep disturbances were not as serious as expected in either city. Furthermore, window orientation in the home was found to affect activity disturbances.     

A measurement model for general noise reaction in response to aircraft noise

In this paper a measurement model for general noise reaction (GNR) in response to aircraft noise is developed to assess the performance of aircraft noise annoyance and a direct measure of general reaction as indicators of this concept. For this purpose GNR is conceptualized as a superordinate latent construct underlying particular manifestations. This conceptualization is empirically tested through estimation of a second-order factor model. Data from a community survey at Frankfurt Airport are used for this purpose (N=2206). The data fit the hypothesized factor structure well and support the conceptualization of GNR as a superordinate construct. It is concluded that noise annoyance and a direct measure of general reaction to noise capture a large part of the negative feelings and emotions in response to aircraft noise but are unable to capture all relevant variance. The paper concludes with recommendations for the valid measurement of community reaction and several directions for further research.     

The relationship between civil aircraft noise and community annoyance in Korea

Studies of community annoyance caused by civil aircraft noise exposure were carried out in 18 areas around Gimpo and Gimhae international airports in order to accumulate social survey data and assess the relationship between aircraft noise levels and annoyance responses in Korea. WECPNL, adopted as the aircraft noise index in Korea, and the percentage of respondents who felt highly annoyed (%HA) have been used to assess the dose-response of aircraft noise. Aircraft noise levels were measured automatically by airport noise monitoring system, B&K type 3597. Social surveys were carried out to people living within 100 m of noise measurement points. The Questionnaire used in the survey contained demographic factors, noise annoyance, interference with daily activities and health-related symptoms. The question relating to the aircraft noise annoyance was answered on an 11-point numerical scale. The randomly selected respondents who were aged between 18 and 70 years completed the questionnaire by themselves. In total, 705 respondents participated in the questionnaire. The results show that WECPNL, noise metric considering characteristics of event and intrusive noise, is more reasonable than L_dn, noise metric considering total sound, to assess the effects of aircraft noise on health. It is also shown that the annoyance responses caused by aircraft noise in Korea seems higher than those reported in other countries.     

The relationship between railway noise and community annoyance in Korea

A study of community annoyance caused by exposures to railway noise was carried out in 18 areas along railway lines to accumulate social survey data and assess the relationship between railway noise levels and annoyance responses in Korea. Railway noise levels were measured with portable sound-level meters. Social surveys were administered to people living within 50 m of noise measurement sites. A questionnaire contained demographic factors, degree of noise annoyance, interference with daily activities, and health-related symptoms. The question relating to noise annoyance was answered on an 11-point numerical scale. The randomly selected respondents, who were aged between 18 to 70 years of age, completed the questionnaire independently. In total, 726 respondents participated in social surveys. Taking into consideration the urban structure and layout of the residential areas of Korea, Japan, and Europe, one can assume that the annoyance responses caused by the railway noise in this study will be similar to those found in Japan, which are considerably more severe than those found in European countries. This study showed that one of the most important factors contributing to the difference in the annoyance responses between Korea and Europe is the distance between railways and houses.     

The response to railway noise in residential areas in Great Britain

The effects of railway noise on residents have been measured with a combined social survey (1453 respondents) and noise measurement survey (over 2000 noise measurements) at 403 locations in 75 study areas in Great Britain. In the analysis of the data methods have been used which take into account many typical noise survey problems including noise measurement errors, unique locality effects and the weakness of the noise annoyance relationship. Railway noise bothers 2% of the nation's population. Approximately 170 000 people live where railway noise levels are above 65 dB(A) 24 hour L_eq. Annoyance increases steadily with noise level; thus there is no particular “acceptable” noise level. Railway noise is less annoying than aircraft or road traffic noise of equivalent noise level, at least above 50 to 65L_eq. Noise is rated as the most serious environmental nuisance caused by railways. Maintenance noise is rated as a bigger problem than passing train noise. Vibration is the most important non-noise problem. Reactions to vibrations are related to distance from route, train speed and number of trains. The railway survey's highly stratified, probability sample design with many study areas makes it possible to evaluate the effects of area characteristics on reactions. The 24 h L_eq dB(A) noise index is more closely related to annoyance than are other accepted noise indices examined. There is no support for ambient noise level or night-time corrections. Thirteen railway operation characteristics were examined. One, the type of traction, has a strong effect on reactions after controlling for L_eq (overhead electrified routes are the equivalent of about 10 dB less annoying at high noise levels). Three indicators of railway ancillary noises and non-noise environmental nuisances affect annoyance but most operational characteristics have no effect. The effects of over 35 demographic, attitudinal and neighbourhood characteristics on annoyance are examined. Though most objective characteristics of neighbourhoods and respondents are not correlated with annoyance, three do decrease annoyance (older dwellings, older respondents, and life-time residence). The attitudes which affect annoyance with railway noise are not general ones about railways as transportation sources, but rather ones which are specific to the neighbourhood setting or to railways as environmental intrusions in the neighbourhood. Such attitudes often have less effect on annoyance at low noise levels. In such cases it is the reactions of the more annoyed types of people which are most closely related to noise level.     

Effect of background noise levels on community annoyance from aircraft noise

A study of community annoyance caused by exposures to civil aircraft noise was carried out in 20 sites around Gimpo and Gimhae international airports to investigate the effect of background noise in terms of dose-effect relationships between aircraft noise levels and annoyance responses under real conditions. Aircraft noise levels were mainly measured using airport noise monitoring systems, B&K type 3597. Social surveys were administered to people living within 100 m of noise measurement sites. The question relating to the annoyance of aircraft noise was answered on an 11-point numerical scale. The randomly selected respondents, who were aged between 18 and 70 years, completed the questionnaire independently. In total, 753 respondents participated in social surveys. The result shows that annoyance responses in low background noise regions are much higher than those in high background noise regions, even though aircraft noise levels are the same. It can be concluded that the background noise level is one of the important factors on the estimation of community annoyance from aircraft noise exposure.     

Individual differences in noise annoyance and the uncomfortable loudness level

Uncomfortable loudness levels were measured for two groups of subjects with either high or low scores on a noise annoyance questionnaire. The study was conducted in two stages. In the first stage scores of noise annoyance, general annoyance and locus of control were obtained from 122 respondents. Two groups of responders on the noise annoyance questionnaire attended the laboratory for the second stage involving a determination of the uncomfortable loudness level (ULL) by two methods (Békésy and analogue adjustment) and for two types of sound source (white noise and a 1 kHz tone). The key findings from the first stage were that (i) noise annoyance scores were not bimodal, showing no significant deviation from normality, (ii) females showed higher noise annoyance and (iii) both general annoyance and locus of control scales showed significant positive correlations with noise annoyance. Findings from the second stage showed that (i) Békésy determinations gave higher ULL's than those from the analogue adjustment method, (ii) based on annoyance scores, noise-annoyed subjects produced significantly higher ULL's than their less annoyed counterparts but only with the analogue determination with a 1 kHz tone, (iii) females produced markedly lower ULL's than males and (iv) deactivation, locus of control and extroversion were identified as mediating factors in the setting of the ULL. The results were further discussed in terms of methodological differences between this and earlier studies.     

Evaluating the equivalence of verbal scales and question stems to be used in English and Japanese noise annoyance questions

Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the equivalence of noise annoyance scales and questions recommended by Team 6 (Community Response to Noise) of ICBEN for English and Japanese, two strikingly different languages. The first experiment was conducted with bilingual subjects in order to test a key assumption of the method established by ICBEN Team 6 for the development of equivalent noise annoyance scales: subjects who speak different languages interpret the concept of “highest degree” of annoyance similarly. The results indicate that English- and Japanese-speaking subjects do interpret the “highest degree” similarly. The second experiment tested for effects of wording differences. English- and Japanese-speaking subjects were presented with noise annoyance questions of one of three format types. The first type was similar to the question format recommended by ICBEN Team 6. It focused on the degree to which a given noise would “bother, disturb, or annoy” the subject. The second asked subjects to evaluate the “bothersome, annoying, or disturbing” quality of the noise. The third asked how much the noise would “worry, irritate, or concern” the subject. No significant difference was found in responses to the three formats when subjects evaluated noise in laboratory conditions.     

Subjective evaluation of work environment with special reference to noise

The presence of subjective noise annoyance was investigated among workers in a machine factory and a textile mill by using a questionnaire. The relation between annoyance due to noise and annoyance caused by other factors in the work environment was also investigated. The results show that annoyance due to noise exposure was common in both factories. Apart from the relation to the noise level, other acoustical characteristics, such as frequency spectrum and intensity, as well as differences between background and peak levels seem to determine the extent of annoyance. In the machine factory, the general satisfaction at work was significantly less among workers who had reported annoyance from noise, insufficient natural and artificial daylight and dust. In the textile mill noise and dust as well as monotonous work and fast working pace were of importance for the general satisfaction at work. Headache and tiredness were more common in the textile mill. The techniques used in the study could be applied to obtain further information on other industrial noise exposure criteria than hearing damage to serve as a basis for standards for annoyance.     

Bound formula for determining the fundamental frequency

The extent of interference with various activities was studied among populations in areas exposed to noise from aircraft, road traffic, trains and tramways. When areas with differences in the extent of general annoyance were compared, similar differences in the extent of the various activity interferences were found, except for those due to vibrations. As an example of the differences in the activity interference pattern, it was found that road traffic noise interfered significantly less with speech than train noise, whereas both noise types caused roughly the same interference with rest/sleep. The results suggest that uniform weighted annoyance scores incorporating various kinds of activity interference are not valid for all types of environmental noises. Interference due to vibrations probably has to be treated separately from that due to noise.     

Subjective effects of traffic noise exposure: reliability and seasonal effects

Repeated interview surveys were made in suburban residential areas of London. At six selected sites, four sets of interviews were conducted at different times of year and at a further two sites two sets of interviews were conducted during summer months. At all sites traffic noise levels were measured over 24 hours at each interview phase with a microphone 1 m from the dwelling facade at first floor level. Seasonal weather data were also collected. In the course of the repeated interviews the initial sample of 364 respondents was reduced to 222. The questionnaire included two types of noise nuisance scale, questions bearing on the typicality of road traffic conditions, and on the opening and closing of windows. The results confirm others already reported but in addition, show that if annoyance scores are averaged over repeated occasions a highly significant increase in reliability is obtained, and the proportion of score variance accounted for by noise increases significantly. No evidence was found of seasonal changes in traffic noise levels and annoyance scores did not vary significantly despite significant differences in the proportion of windows open at different times of the year.     

Effect of season and meteorological conditions on community noise annoyance

More than 80 000 residents' responses to transportation noise from 42 studies conducted at different times of year provide statistical estimates of the effects of season and meteorological conditions on community response to noise. The strongest evidence for a seasonal effect comes from 7 years of continuous daily interviewing of nationally representative probability samples in the Netherlands. Long-term annoyance with noise is slightly, but statistically significantly, higher in the summer than in the winter. Analyses of 41 other surveys drawn from diverse countries, climates, and times of year also provide evidence that noise annoyance varies over the year, is increased by temperature, and may be increased by more sunshine, less precipitation, and reduced wind speeds. These findings are not sufficiently precise to determine whether the apparent relationships with meteorological conditions are only the result of seasonal variations or are also the result of differences in the climate at different locations. There is not consistent evidence that the meteorological conditions on the day of the interview or the immediately preceding days have any more effect on long-term noise annoyance measures than do the conditions over the immediately preceding weeks or months.     

Penalty for impulse noise, derived from annoyance ratings for impulse and road-traffic sounds

In the laboratory, four groups of 16 subjects rated the annoyance caused by three types of impulse sounds (regular and irregular gunfire noise and metal-construction noise) and by road-traffic sounds, all presented in background noise. The subjects were presented with the sounds for 5-min periods. The annoyance ratings were related to the A-weighted equivalent level (Leq) of the sounds. From these annoyance ratings a correction term or penalty was derived, which, added to the Leq of the impulse sounds, gives the level of equally annoying traffic noise. The correction was determined for conditions in which (1) only the annoyance caused by specific sources, or (2) the annoyance caused by the total sound (specific source plus background) had to be rated. In addition, the indoor Leq of the constantly present background noise was 35 or 55 dB(A) by and large, the results showed that for lower levels of the sounds an impulse-noise correction of at least 10 dB was required, whereas for higher levels the derived correction was about equal to the ISO/R 1996 penalty of 5 dB. This conclusion, based on the relation between Leq and annoyance ratings, is consistent with the correction based on Leq and the percentage of subjects who reported to be "very much annoyed." For equivalent levels of the impulse sounds at which 33% of the subjects claimed to be very much annoyed, the correction was 10 dB for the conditions in which the indoor Leq of the background noise was 35 dB(A), and 5 dB when this Leq was 55 dB(A).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

A criterion for predicting the annoyance due to higher level,low frequency noise

Annoyance due to low frequency noise is more qidespread than was at one time believed and case histories indicate that the annoyance is not predicted accurately by a dB(A) measurement. In this study the psychophysical magnitude estimation technique was used to determine if a predictor of low frequency noise annoyance, superior to the dB(A), could be found. Ten noise measures were considered and it was concluded tentatively that the dB(B) noise measure could be used to predict the annoyance due to levels of low frequency noise in the range 90–105 dB overall SPL.