Numerous relationships between noise exposure and transportation noise-induced annoyance have been inferred by curve-fitting methods. The present paper develops a different approach. It derives a systematic relationship by applying an a priori, first-principles model to the findings of forty three studies of the annoyance of aviation noise. The rate of change of annoyance with day-night average sound level (DNL) due to aircraft noise exposure was found to closely resemble the rate of change of loudness with sound level. The agreement of model predictions with the findings of recent curve-fitting exercises (cf. Miedma and Vos, 1998) is noteworthy, considering that other analyses have relied on different analytic methods and disparate data sets. Even though annoyance prevalence rates within individual communities consistently grow in proportion to duration-adjusted loudness, variability in annoyance prevalence rates across communities remains great. The present analyses demonstrate that 1) community-specific differences in annoyance prevalence rates can be plausibly attributed to the joint effect of acoustic and non-DNL related factors and (2) a simple model can account for the aggregate influences of non-DNL related factors on annoyance prevalence rates in different communities in terms of a single parameter expressed in DNL units-a "community tolerance level."

Behaviorally confirmed awakenings were recorded during nighttime hours for periods of approximately one month in 45 homes of 82 test participants. Measurements of awakening and of both indoor and outdoor noise exposure were made for a total of 632 subject nights near a military airfield, 783 subject nights near a civil airport, and 472 subject nights in neighborhoods with community noise exposure of nonaircraft origin. Sound exposure levels of individual noise intrusions were much more closely associated with awakenings than long-term noise exposure levels. The slope of the relationship between awakening and sound exposure level was rather shallow, however. Although the present findings do not resemble those of laboratory studies of noise-induced sleep interference, they are in good agreement with the results of other field studies.

The findings of 21 studies of the effects of noise on sleep were reanalyzed in an effort to develop a quantitative dosage-response relationship. Large and systematic differences in sleep disturbance were observed between the findings of studies conducted in laboratory and in field settings. The influence of noise on sleep was also found to depend on additional factors such as the nature of noise and response metrics, noise source, background noise level, length of study, and sex of test participants. No reliable quantitative model for sleep disturbance could be developed from the studies reviewed.

Fidell et al. [(2011), J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130(2), 791-806] have shown (1) that the rate of growth of annoyance with noise exposure reported in attitudinal surveys of the annoyance of aircraft noise closely resembles the exponential rate of change of loudness with sound level, and (2) that the proportion of a community highly annoyed and the variability in annoyance prevalence rates in communities are well accounted for by a simple model with a single free parameter: a community tolerance level (abbreviated CTL, and represented symbolically in mathematical expressions as L(ct)), expressed in units of DNL. The current study applies the same modeling approach to predicting the prevalence of annoyance of road traffic and rail noise. The prevalence of noise-induced annoyance of all forms of transportation noise is well accounted for by a simple, loudness-like exponential function with community-specific offsets. The model fits all of the road traffic findings well, but the prevalence of annoyance due to rail noise is more accurately predicted separately for interviewing sites with and without high levels of vibration and/or rattle.

Field measurements were conducted of potential sleep disturbance associated with changes in nighttime aircraft noise exposure near three airports. One study was conducted near Stapleton International Airport (DEN) and Denver International Airport (DIA) in anticipation of the closure of the former and opening of the latter. Sleep behavior was monitored in 57 homes located near runway ends at the two airports. A second study was conducted in the vicinity of DeKalb-Peachtree Airport (PDK), a large general aviation airport that expected increased nighttime flight operations due to the Olympic Games in July and August of 1996. Similar methods of measuring nighttime noise levels and sleep disturbance in the two studies were maintained over the course of 2717 and 686 subject-nights of observations, respectively. No major differences in noise-induced sleep disturbance were observed as a function of changes in nighttime aircraft noise exposure.