ArticleNoise & health
Annoyance and task performance during a single high-level aircraft noise and multiple lower-level aircraft noises.
Article in Noise & health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMeasurement of noise exposure tends to focus on sound level; however, the number of noise events might also influence health and cognition. We investigated how the distribution of noise events over time influences experiences of loudness, annoyance, and task performance. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe presented recordings of a passenger aircraft flying overhead, either as a single 15-s overflight at 80 dB LeqA 15s or four 15-s overflights at 60 dB LeqA 15s . Levels were chosen on the basis that an increase of 10 dB doubles the perceived loudness, thus four stimuli at 60 dB might be expected to seem as loud as a single stimulus at 80 dB. Participants performed a mental arithmetic task during half the stimulus presentations and rated their perception of loudness and annoyance to every presentation, while pulse and skin conductance were monitored.
resultsOverall, the single 80-dB-flight stimulus was perceived as louder ( F = 124.519, P < 0.001) and more annoying ( F = 63.530, P < 0.001) than the four 60-dB flights. Noise did not influence task performance; however, there was an interaction ( F = 36.256, P < 0.001) in that while doing the task, the four 60-dB flights were perceived as louder and more annoying than without the task, whereas the single 80-dB stimulus was less loud and no more annoying than without the task. Physiological markers were consistent with the intent that the task be difficult and that the single high-sound-level stimulus was more stressful for participants.
conclusionResults showed that, at the levels used, the higher-level stimulus influenced ratings of loudness and annoyance, even though the lower-level stimulus occurred four times as often. Future research exploring systematically the relationship between the number and sound level of overflights and the reactions they induce is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.