Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T17:32:51.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Noise annoyance with regard to neurophysiological sensitivity, subjective noise sensitivity and personality variables

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

Evy Öhrström ,
Martin Björkman  and
Ragnar Rylander
Evy Öhrström*
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Hygiene, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
Martin Björkman
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Hygiene, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
Ragnar Rylander
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Hygiene, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
*
1Address for correspondence: Dr E. Öhrström, Department of Environmental Hygiene, University of Gothenburg, Box 33031, S–400 33 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

To evaluate the relation between annoyance to environmental noise, general neurophysiological sensitivity, subjective noise sensitivity and other individual characteristics, experiments were undertaken in which 93 subjects assessed their subjective annoyance after exposure to noise under laboratory conditions. Evaluations were made of the discomfort threshold for pulsating sound, the light discomfort, and heat and cold discomfort. The heart rate and discomfort after exposure to a series of impulse noises was also determined. Subjective noise sensitivity, attitudes to noise, mood and personality characteristics of the subjects were evaluated using questionnaires.

The results show that the annoyance after exposure to noise was not closely related to the general neurophysiological sensitivity, measured as discomfort threshold for noise, heat, cold and light; or to the heart rate reaction or discomfort after exposure to impulse noise. The annoyance was highly correlated with subjectively reported noise sensitivity and with the attitude to noise. There was also a relationship with neuroticism, measured with the EPI scale.

It is suggested that the subjective noise sensitivity, attitude and neuroticism for the definition of noise sensitivity be defined in future studies of long term effects of noise exposure.

Type
Research Article
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , August 1988 , pp. 605 - 613
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aniansson, K., Pettersson, K. & Peterson, Y. (1983). Traffic noise annoyance and noise sensitivity in persons with normal and impaired hearing. Journal of Sound and Vibration 88, 85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, E. (1945). Some tests for the discrimination of neurotic from normal subjects. British Journal of Psychological Medicine 20, 271–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borsky, P. N. (1954). Community aspects of aircraft annoyance. National Opinion Center, University of Chicago, No. 34.Google Scholar
Borsky, P. N. (1980). Response to noise. In Noise as a Public Health Problem Proceedings of the Third International Congress. ASHA Report No. 10 (ed. Tobias, J. W., Jansen, G. and Ward, W. D.), pp. 452–474. American Speech-Language Hearing Association: Rockville, Maryland.Google Scholar
Broadbent, D. E. (1972). Individual differences in annoyance by noise. Sound 6, 56–61.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1965). The Scientific Analysis of Personality. Penguin Books: London.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. & Eysenck, S. B. (1968). Eysenck Personality Inventory, London University Press: London.Google Scholar
Francois, J. (1980). Aircraft noise, annoyance and personal characteristics. In Noise as a Public Health Problem Proceedings of the Third International Congress. ASHA Report No. 10 (ed. Tobias, J. W., Jansen, G. and Ward, W. D.), pp. 594–599. American Speech-Language Hearing Association: Rockville, Maryland.Google Scholar
Fruhstorfer, H., Lindblom, U. & Schmidt, W. G. (1976). Method for quantitative estimations of thermal thresholds in patients. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry (London) 39, 1071–1075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, I. D. & Delauzun, F. R. (1977). Individual differences in sensitivity to traffic noise: and empirical study. Journal of Sound and Vibration 55, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, I. D. & Langdon, F. J. (1968). Subjective response to road traffic noise. Journal of Sound and Vibration 8, 16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansen, G. & Hoffman, H. (1965). Lärmbedingte Änderungen der Feinmotorik und Läutligkeitsempfindungen in Abhängigheit vom bestimmten Persönlichkeitsdimensionen. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie (Göttingen) 12, 594–613.Google Scholar
Langdon, F. J. (1976). Noise nuisance caused by road traffic in residential areas: part III. Journal of Sound and Vibration 49, 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKennell, A. C. & Hunt, E. A. (1966). Noise Annoyance in Central London. The Government Social Survey. HMSO: London.Google Scholar
Moreira, N. M. & Bryan, M. E. (1972). Noise annoyance susceptibility. Journal of Sound and Vibration 21, 449–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Öhström, E., Björkman, M. & Rylander, R. (1980). Laboratory annoyance and different traffic noise sources. Journal of Sound and Vibration 70, 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rövekamp, A. J. M. (1983). Physiological effects on environmental noise on normal and more sound sensitive human beings. In Noise as a Public Health Problem (ed. Rossi, G.). Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress, Edizioni Tecniche a cura del Centro Ricerche e Studi Amplifon 1, 605–614.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (1956). Non-parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill: Tokyo.Google Scholar
Sjöberg, L., Svensson, E. & Persson, L-O (1977). The measurement of mood. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 19, 1–18.Google Scholar
Sörensen, S. (1970). On the possibilities of changing the annoyance reaction to noise by changing the attitudes to the source of annoyance. Nordisk hygienisk Tidskrift suppl. 1, pp. 1–76.Google Scholar
Stansfield, S., Clark, C. R., Jenkins, L. M. & Tarnopolsky, A. (1985). Sensitivity to noise in a community sample. I. Measurement of psychiatric disorder and personality. Psychological Medicine 15, 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarnopolsky, A. & Morton-Williams, J. (1980).Aircraft noise and prevalence of psychiatric. Disorders Research Report, Social and Community. Planning Research 35, Northampton Square, London EC1.Google Scholar
Taylor, S. M. (1984). A path model of aircraft noise annoyance. Journal of Sound and Vibration 96, 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinstein, N. P. (1978). Individual differences in relation to noise: a longitudinal study in a college dormitory. Journal of Applied Psychology 63, 458–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar