Soundscape in the sustainable living environment: A cross-cultural comparison between the UK and Taiwan

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 482-483, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 501-509

  Yu, Chia Jen ^a   Kang, Jian ^b  

^a MINGDAO UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Culture; Noise; Perception; Residential areas; Soundscape; Urban

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC NOISE; CELL CULTURE; HOUSING; SENSORY PERCEPTION;

COMPARATIVE STUDIES; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISONS; ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; NOISE; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS; RESIDENTIAL AREAS; SOUNDSCAPES; URBAN;

SURVEYS;

ACOUSTICS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CULTURAL INFLUENCE; NOISE; PERCEPTION; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION;

ANNOYANCE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CULTURAL FACTOR; ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; HUMAN; NOISE POLLUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESIDENTIAL AREA; SLEEP DEPRIVATION; SOUND INTENSITY; SOUND LEVEL MEASUREMENT; SOUND TRANSMISSION; SOUNDSCAPE; TAIWAN; UNITED KINGDOM;

TAIWAN; UNITED KINGDOM;

CULTURE; NOISE; PERCEPTION; RESIDENTIAL AREAS; SOUNDSCAPE; URBAN;

CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; GREAT BRITAIN; HOUSING; HUMANS; NOISE; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SLEEP DISORDERS; TAIWAN; URBAN POPULATION;

EID: 84897957842     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: 18791026     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.10.107     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bateman I.J., Day B., Lake I., Lovett A.A. The effect of road traffic on residential property values: a literature review and hedonic pricing study 2001, Report commissioned by the Scottish Executive Development Department, Edinburgh.
2. Berglund B., Lindvall T., Schwela D.H. Guidelines for community noise. World Health Organization report 1999.
3. DataKustik GmbH. Cadna/A for Windows - UserManual.Munich, Germany; 2007.
4. Cowell J.R. Sustainable design in acoustics. Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics 2005.
5. Fields J.M. Effect of personal and situational variables on noise annoyance in residential areas. J Acoust Soc Am 1993, 93:2753-2763.
6. Gjestland T. Regional differences in noise annoyance assessments. Proceedings of inter-noise 1998.
7. Guski R. Psychological methods for evaluating sound quality and assessing acoustic information. Acustica united with acta acustica 1997, 83:765-774.
8. Guski R. Psychological determinants of train noise annoyance. Proceedings of euro-noise 1998.
9. Hawkins R. Review of studies on external costs of noise 1999, Environmental Protection Economics Division of the (former) UK Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR).
10. Huang Z. Environmental noise situation of residential areas and the change with city expansion in Xi'an City, China 2004, (MArch dissertation), University of Sheffield, School of Architecture, UK.
11. Hufschmidt M.M., James D.E., Meister A.S., Browen B.T., Dixon J.A. Environment, natural systems, and development: an economic valuation guide 1983, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
12. Kang J. Urban Sound Environment 2006, Taylor & Francis incorporating Spon, London.
13. Kuwano S., Namba S., Florentine M., Zheng D.R., Fastl H., Schick A. A cross-cultural study of the factors of sound quality of environmental noise. Abstract published in Journal of Acoustical Society of America 1999, 105:1081.
14. Miedema H.M.E., Vos H. Demographic and attitudinal factors that modify annoyance from transportation noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1999, 105:3336-3344.
15. Navrud S. The state-of-the-art on economic valuation of noise. Final Report to European Commission Directorate-General (DG) Environment 2002.
16. Nelson J.P. Highway noise and property values: a survey of recent evidence. J Transp Econ Policy 1982, 16:117-138.
17. Peyton C.H. Creating through sustainable design. Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics 2005.
18. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicate markets: product differentiation in pure competition. J Polit Econ 1974, 82:34-55.
19. Rylander R., Sorensen S., Kajland A. Annoyance reaction from aircraft noise exposure. J Sound Vib 1972, 24:419-444.
20. Sato T. A path analysis of the effect of vibration on road traffic noise annoyance. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem 1993.
21. SPSS 13.0, Windows, 2005.
22. Tonin R. A method of strategic traffic noise impact analysis. Proceedings of inter-noise 1996.
23. Turner R.K., Pearce D.W., Bateman I.J. Environmental economics: an elementary introduction 1994, Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead.
24. Walters A.A. Noise and prices 1975, Oxford University Press, London.
25. Wardman M., Bristow A.L. Noise and air quality valuations: evidence from stated preference residential choice models. Transp Res 2004, 9:1-27.
26. Yang W., Kang J. Acoustic comfort evaluation in urban open public spaces. Appl Acoust 2005, 66:211-229.
27. Yang W., Kang J. Soundscape and sound preferences in urban squares. J Urban Des 2005, 10:69-88.
28. Yu C. Environmentally sustainable acoustics in urban residential areas 2008, (PhD dissertation), University of Sheffield, School of Architecture, UK.
29. Zimmer K., Ellermeier W. Psychometric properties of four measures of noise sensitivity: a comparison. J Environ Psychol 1999, 19:295-302.