Direct comparison of community response to road traffic noise and to aircraft noise

Hall, Fred L.; Birnie, S.E.; Taylor, S. Martin; Palmer, J E G

doi:10.1121/1.387234

Cited by 39 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the use of these scales may range from employing a single question as a measure of reaction (e.g., Rylander et al, 1972) to constructing a weighted composite of several scales, with weightings based on regression analysis (e.g., Hede and Bullen, 1982b). The aggregation of reaction measures for grouped data may vary from averaging the general reaction score or averaging annoyance (Bradley, 1978), to calculating the percentage disturbed or percentage highly disturbed (Hall et al, 1979), or percentage annoyed or percentage very annoyed (Rylander et al, 1972), to percentage seriously affected (Hede and Bullen, 1982a). Given the considerable individual variation on these factors, only a relatively small number of studies occur in each.…”

Section: The Correlations Reported Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community response to noise: A review of factors influencing the relationship between noise exposure and reaction

Job

1988

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

258

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social surveys of the relationship between noise exposure and the subjective reactions to it were reviewed. This review indicated that remarkably similar results have been obtained across different nationalities with different measurement techniques. Only a small percentage (typically less than 20% ) of the variation in individual reaction is accounted for by noise exposure. Analysis of potential errors in both measurement of noise and reaction suggests that elimination of errors would only slightly increase the observed correlations. Variables, such as attitude to the noise source and sensitivity to noise, account for more variation in reaction than does noise exposure. The weaker relationship between noise exposure and attitude than between reaction and attitude suggests that the attitude/reaction relationship is not entirely due to noise exposure causing a change in attitude itself. Noise/reaction correlations based on individual data are significantly lower in studies of impulsive noise than nonimpulsive noise. This may be caused, in part, by the restricted range of noise exposure studied in some socioacoustic investigations of impulsive noise. However, the significantly higher correlations of attitude and reaction in impulsive noise studies suggest that attitude plays an even larger part, while noise exposure plays a lesser part in determining reaction to impulsive noise, relative to nonimpulsive noise.

show abstract

Section: The Correlations Reported Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community response to noise: A review of factors influencing the relationship between noise exposure and reaction

Job

1988

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

258

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Findings from surveys on noise annoyance in adults show that at the same physical sound level (e.g. L eq ), aircraft noise is perceived as more annoying than road traffic noise, which in turn is more annoying than train noise (Fields & Walker, 1982;Hall et al, 1981;Knall & Schuemer, 1983;Moehler, 1988;Taylor, 1982Taylor, , 1993. Assuming that both annoyance and learning reflect a general interference from noise in both children and adults, it was expected that aircraft noise would impair long-term learning more than road traffic noise would, which in turn would be more detrimental than train noise.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Classroom experiments on the effects of different noise sources and sound levels on long‐term recall and recognition in children

Hygge

2003

Applied Cognitive Psychology

122

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 1358 children aged 12-14 years participated in ten noise experiments in their ordinary classrooms and were tested for recall and recognition of a text exactly one week later. Single and combined noise sources were presented for 15 min at 66 dBA L eq (equivalent noise level). Single source presentations of aircraft and road traffic noise were also presented at 55 dBA L eq . Data were analysed between subjects since the first within-subjects analysis revealed a noise after-effect or a asymmetric transfer effect. Overall, there was a strong noise effect on recall, and a smaller, but significant effect on recognition. In the single-source studies, aircraft and road traffic noise impaired recall at both noise levels. Train noise and verbal noise did not affect recognition or recall. Some of the pairwise combinations of aircraft noise with train or road traffic, with one or the other as the dominant source, interfered with recall and recognition. Item difficulty, item position and ability did not interact with the noise effect. Arousal, distraction, perceived effort, and perceived difficulty in reading and learning did not mediate the effects on recall and recognition.

show abstract

“…Reaction to aircraft noise depends on the way in which individuals experience undesirable noise. Attitude surveys, which were conducted to evaluate reaction and annoyance to aircraft noise, established the need for land use planning guidelines in harmony with airport operations [1,[4][5][6][7]. Accordingly, exposure forecasts become essential when noise is a significant factor in urban development near airports.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment Of Noise Impacts At Airports

El‐Fadel

Chahine

Baaj

et al. 2002

International Journal of Environmental Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airport operation is a major source of community concerns due to aircraft noise emissions particularly in locations close to airports and aircraft flight tracks. The effects of aircraft noise on humans can cause hearing damage for people working at airports and speech and sleep interference which can develop into stress for nearby communities. As such, it becomes essential when locating and designing to expand airports to optimize flight paths in a way to reduce noise exposure to nearby communities. For this purpose, it is required to assess changes in noise levels resulting from new runway configurations, evaluate increased aircraft operation demand, new fleet mix, revised routings and airspace structures, alternative flight profiles, and modifications to other operational procedures. This paper presents a noise impact assessment for the proposed expansion at the Beirut International Airport, Lebanon. Field noise measurements were collected at sensitive noise receptors along selected locations around the airport and the corresponding airport traffic flow was characterized. A mathematical model was then applied to simulate noise levels as a function of the different airplane classes, operations, flight path, and landing characteristics. The model was also used to predict future noise levels, optimize airplane flight path, and assess mitigation measures to minimize potential aircraft noise impacts.

show abstract

Direct comparison of community response to road traffic noise and to aircraft noise

Cited by 39 publications

References 0 publications

Community response to noise: A review of factors influencing the relationship between noise exposure and reaction

Community response to noise: A review of factors influencing the relationship between noise exposure and reaction

Classroom experiments on the effects of different noise sources and sound levels on long‐term recall and recognition in children

Assessment Of Noise Impacts At Airports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About