The influence of preconceptions on perceived sound reduction by environmental noise barriers

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 408, Issue 20, 2010, Pages 4368-4375

  Joynt, Jennifer L R ^a   Kang, Jian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Acoustics; Environment; Intersensory; Materials; Noise barriers; Perception

Indexed keywords

AESTHETIC PREFERENCE; BARRIER MATERIAL; CONSTITUENT MATERIALS; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE; IN-SITU; INFLUENTIAL FACTORS; INTERSENSORY; INVERSE CORRELATION; NOISE ATTENUATION; NOISE BARRIERS; NOISE LEVELS; PERCEPTION; SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL; SOUND REDUCTION; VISUAL STIMULUS;

ACOUSTIC NOISE MEASUREMENT; VIRTUAL REALITY;

AUDIO ACOUSTICS;

ACOUSTICS; ESTHETICS; NOISE; PERCEPTION;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CONCRETE NOISE BARRIER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECIDUOUS VEGETATION; METAL NOISE BARRIER; NOISE; NOISE MEASUREMENT; NOISE POLLUTION; NOISE REDUCTION; PERCEPTION; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOUND DETECTION; SOUND PRESSURE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TIMBER NOISE BARRIER; VIRTUAL REALITY; VISUAL STIMULATION; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; ESTHETICS; EVALUATION STUDY; HUMAN; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PUBLIC OPINION; TRAFFIC NOISE;

ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION; ESTHETICS; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; NOISE, TRANSPORTATION; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC OPINION; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND REMEDIATION;

EID: 77955925812     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.04.020     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Aylor D.E., Marks L.E. Perception of noise transmitted through barriers. J Acoust Soc Am 1976, 59:397-400.
2. Bailey K., Grossardt T. Structured public involvement in context-sensitive noise wall design using casewise visual evaluation. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 2006, 1984:112-120.
3. Cohn L. Highway noise barriers: national co-operative highway research program synthesis of highway practice 87 1981, Washington DC, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.
4. Cohn L., Bowlby W.J. Minimizing highway noise barrier intrusions. J Environ Eng 1984, 110:534-549.
5. Cohn L., McVoy G. Environmental analysis of transportation systems 1982, John Wiley & Sons, USA.
6. Dénes J., Keedwell A.D. Latin squares: new developments in the theory and applications 1991, Amsterdam; Oxford, Holland.
7. European Parliament Directive relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise 2002/49/EC 2002, European Parliament and of the Council.
8. Golding S. Road noise barriers: experience on western arterial roads in Brisbane. Transp Plann 1986, 13:264-274.
9. Gramm Barriers. (2003). Personal telephone communication with the author, September 24 2003.
10. Hall F.L. Attitudes towards noise barriers before and after construction: highway noise abatement. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 1980, 740.
11. Holm L., Mantyla T. Memory for scenes: refixations reflect retrieval. Mem Cogn 2007, 35:1664-1674.
12. Joynt, J.L.R. (2005). A sustainable approach to environmental noise barrier design. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
13. Kragh J. Road traffic noise attenuation by belts of trees. J Sound Vibration 1981, 74:235-241.
14. Kryter K.D. The effects of noise on man 1968, Academic, New York.
15. Md-Taha, M. (1999). Public perception of road traffic noise barriers-UK and Malaysian perspective. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Aberystwyth, Aberystwyth.
16. Meredith M. Program to incorporate the video and audio clips in one sequence 2003, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
17. Mulligan B.E., Lewis S.E., Faupel M.L., Goodman L.S., Anderson L.M. Enhancement and masking of loudness by environmental factors vegetation and noise. Environ Behav 1987, 19:411-443.
18. Nilson M.E. A-weighted sound pressure level as an indicator of short-term loudness or annoyance of road-traffic sound. J Sound Vibration 2007, 302:197-207.
19. Nilson M.E., Andéhn M., Leśna P. Evaluating roadside noise barriers using an annoyance-reduction criterion. J Acoust Soc Am 2008, 124:3561-3567.
20. Orsman B. Restraints in wall removal 2003, New Zealand Herald, Auckland.
21. Pallant J. SPSS survival manual (version 10 and 11) 2001, Open University Press, Buckingham.
22. Pendakur V.S., Pyplacz B. Urban traffic noise abatement. Transp Q 1984, 38:471-486.
23. Perfater M.A. Community perception of noise barriers 1979, vol. 1. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, Virginia.
24. Stevens J.C., Rubin L.L. Psychophysical scales of apparent heaviness and the size-weight illusion. Percept Psychophys 1970, 8:225-230.
25. Verbruggen F., De Houwer J. Do emotional stimuli interfere with response inhibition? Evidence from the stop signal paradigm. Cogn Emotion 2007, 21:391-403.
26. Viollon S. Two examples of audio-visual interactions in an urban context 2003, Euronoise, Naples, Italy.
27. Viollon S., Lavandier C., Drake C. Influence of visual setting on sound ratings in an urban environment. Appl Acoust 2002, 63:493-511.
28. Walsgrove J., Barlow R. Virtual reality images to aid public involvement in appearance of roads and bridges. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 2001, 1770:166-172.
29. Warren D.H., McCarthy T.J., Welch R.B. Discrepancy and nondiscrepancy methods of assessing visual-auditory interaction. Percept Psychophys 1983, 33:413-419.
30. Watts G.R., Chinn L., Godfrey N. The effects of vegetation on the perception of traffic noise. Appl Acoust 1999, 56:39-56.
31. Watts G.R., Nelson P.M. The relationship between vehicle noise measures and perceived noisiness. J Sound Vibration 1992, 164:425-444.