On the study of effects of views to water space on noise annoyance perceptions at homes

INTERNOISE 2014 - 43rd International Congress on Noise Control Engineering: Improving the World Through Noise Control

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages

  Leung, T M ^a   Chau, C K ^a   Tang, S K ^a   Pun, L S C ^a  

^a HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Noise annoyance; Soundscape; Water spaces

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC NOISE; ACOUSTIC VARIABLES CONTROL; NOISE POLLUTION; SURVEYS;

ADVERSE EFFECT; AUDIO-VISUAL EFFECTS; BUILDING DESIGNERS; NOISE ANNOYANCE; ORDERED LOGIT MODEL; PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS; SOUNDSCAPES;

AUDIO ACOUSTICS;

EID: 84923616502     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. World Health Organization. Night noise guidelines for Europe. Copenhagen: World Health Organization; 2009.
2. Miedema HM, Oudshoorn CG. Annoyance from transportation noise: Relationships with exposure metrics DNL and DENL and their confidence intervals. Environmental health perspectives. 2001 Apr;109(4):409-16.
3. Sato T, Yano T, Björkman M, Rylander R. Road Traffic Noise Annoyance in Relation to Average Noise Level, Number of Events and Maximum Noise Level. Journal of Sound and Vibration. 1999 Jun;223(5):775-84.
4. Korfali SI, Massoud M. Assessment of Community Noise Problem in Greater Beirut Area, Lebanon. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2003 Jun 1;84(3):203-18.
5. De Coensel B, Botteldooren D, De Muer T, Berglund B, Nilsson ME, Lercher P. A model for the perception of environmental sound based on notice-events. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. Acoustical Society of America; 2009 Aug 1;126(2):656-65.
6. OUIS D. ANNOYANCE FROM ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE: A REVIEW. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2001 Mar;21(1):101-20.
7. Guski R. Personal and social variables as co-determinants of noise annoyance. Noise & health. 1999 Jan;1(3):45-56.
8. Iwata O. The relationship of noise sensitivity to health and personality. Japanese Psychological Research. 1984;26(2):75-81.
9. Öhrström E, Björkman M, Rylander R. Noiseannoyance with regard to neurophysiological sensitivity, subjective noise sensitivity and personality variables. Psychological Medicine. Cambridge University Press; 1988 Jul 9;18(03):605.
10. Li HN, Chau CK, Tse MS, Tang SK. On the study of the effects of sea views, greenery views and personal characteristics on noise annoyance perception at homes. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. Acoustical Society of America; 2012 Mar 15;131(3):2131-40.
11. Viollon S, Lavandier C, Drake C. Influence of visual setting on sound ratings in an urban environment. Applied Acoustics. 2002 May;63(5):493-511.
12. Pedersen E, Larsman P. The impact of visual factors on noise annoyance among people living in the vicinity of wind turbines. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2008 Dec;28(4):379-89.
13. Bangjun Z, Lili S, Guoqing D. The influence of the visibility of the source on the subjective annoyance due to its noise. Applied Acoustics. 2003 Dec;64(12):1205-15.
14. Pedersen E, Larsman P. The impact of visual factors on noise annoyance among people living in the vicinity of wind turbines. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2008 Dec;28(4):379-89.
15. Maffiolo V, Castellengo M, Dubois D. Quality judgments of urban soundscapes. Internoise 1999. Fort Lauderdale; 1999. p. 1251-4.
16. Gidlöf-Gunnarsson A, Öhrström E. Noise and well-being in urban residential environments: The potential role of perceived availability to nearby green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2007 Nov;83(2-3):115-26.
17. Li HN, Chau CK, Tang SK. Can surrounding greenery reduce noise annoyance at home? The Science of the total environment. 2010 Jul 15;408(20):4384-4376.
18. Wherrett JR. Creating Landscape Preference Models Using Internet Survey Techniques. Landscape Research. Routledge; 2000 Mar;25(1):79-96.
19. Scott MJ, Canter DV. PICTURE OR PLACE? A MULTIPLE SORTING STUDY OF LANDSCAPE. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 1997 Dec;17(4):263-81.
20. Yabes R, Shetter K, Schneeman J. Urban waterways: changing historical uses and users in a southwestern desert city. Landscape and Urban Planning. 1997 Nov;39(2-3):167-85.
21. Jim CY, Chen WY. Value of scenic views: Hedonic assessment of private housing in Hong Kong. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2009 Jul;91(4):226-34.
22. Laumann K, Gärling T, Stormark KM. Selective attention and heart rate responses to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2003 Jun;23(2):125-34.
23. White M, Smith A, Humphryes K, Pahl S, Snelling D, Depledge M. Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2010 Dec;30(4):482-93.
24. Van den Berg AE, Koole SL, van der Wulp NY. Environmental preference and restoration: (How) are they related? Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2003 Jun;23(2):135-46.
25. Blankson EJ, Green BH. Use of landscape classification as an essential prerequisite to landscape evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning. 1991 Nov;21(3):149-62.
26. ISO. ISO/TS 15666:2003 -Acoustics -Assessment of noise annoyance by means of social and socio-acoustic surveys. 2003.
27. Bjørner TB, Kronbak J, Lundhede T, Forlaget A. Valuation of Noise Reduction -Comparing results from hedonic pricing and contingent valuation. Copenhagen: AKF; 2003.
28. Department of Transport Welsh Office. Calculation of Road Traffic Noise. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office; 1988.