A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise
The aim of the present study is to establish exposure-response relationships reflecting the percentage highly annoyed (%HA) as functions of road traffic, railway, and aircraft noise exposure, measured as day-evening-night level (Lden), as well as to elucidate the degree to which the acoustic indicat...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | Environment International |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041201831897X |
| _version_ | 1828241147168817152 |
|---|---|
| author | Mark Brink Beat Schäffer Danielle Vienneau Maria Foraster Reto Pieren Ikenna C. Eze Christian Cajochen Nicole Probst-Hensch Martin Röösli Jean-Marc Wunderli |
| author_facet | Mark Brink Beat Schäffer Danielle Vienneau Maria Foraster Reto Pieren Ikenna C. Eze Christian Cajochen Nicole Probst-Hensch Martin Röösli Jean-Marc Wunderli |
| author_sort | Mark Brink |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The aim of the present study is to establish exposure-response relationships reflecting the percentage highly annoyed (%HA) as functions of road traffic, railway, and aircraft noise exposure, measured as day-evening-night level (Lden), as well as to elucidate the degree to which the acoustic indicator Intermittency Ratio (IR), which reflects the “eventfulness” of a noise situation, predicts noise annoyance. We conducted a mixed-mode representative population survey in a stratified random sample of 5592 residents exposed to transportation noise all over Switzerland. Source-specific noise exposure was calculated for each floor and each façade based on comprehensive traffic data. Noise annoyance was measured using the ICBEN 11-point scale. The survey was carried out in 4 waves at different times of the year. We hypothesized that in addition to Lden, the effects of noise on annoyance can be better explained when also considering the intensity of short-term variations of noise level over time. We therefore incorporated the acoustic indicator IR in the statistical models. For all noise sources, results revealed significant associations between Lden and %HA after controlling for confounders and independent predictors such as IR (measured over 24 h), exposure to other transportation noise sources, sex and age, language, home ownership, education level, living duration, temperature, and access to a quiet side of the dwelling. Aircraft noise annoyance scored markedly higher than annoyance to railway and road traffic noise at the same Lden level. Railway noise elicited higher percentages of highly annoyed persons than road traffic noise. Results furthermore suggest that for road traffic noise, IR has an additional effect on %HA and can explain shifts of the exposure-response curve of up to about 6 dB between low IR and high IR exposure situations, possibly due to the effect of different durations of noise-free intervals between events. For railway and aircraft noise annoyance, the predictive value of IR was limited. Keywords: Transportation noise, Annoyance, Exposure-response relationship, Noise metric |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T21:54:12Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7cc8cb777091453690e8add78e7fcba2 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0160-4120 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T21:54:12Z |
| publishDate | 2019-04-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Environment International |
| spelling | doaj.art-7cc8cb777091453690e8add78e7fcba22022-12-22T03:15:22ZengElsevierEnvironment International0160-41202019-04-01125277290A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noiseMark Brink0Beat Schäffer1Danielle Vienneau2Maria Foraster3Reto Pieren4Ikenna C. Eze5Christian Cajochen6Nicole Probst-Hensch7Martin Röösli8Jean-Marc Wunderli9Federal Office for the Environment, Bern, Switzerland; Corresponding author.Empa, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, Dübendorf, SwitzerlandSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandEmpa, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, Dübendorf, SwitzerlandSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandUniversity of Basel, Basel, Switzerland; Centre for Chronobiology, Psychiatric Hospital of the University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandEmpa, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, Dübendorf, SwitzerlandThe aim of the present study is to establish exposure-response relationships reflecting the percentage highly annoyed (%HA) as functions of road traffic, railway, and aircraft noise exposure, measured as day-evening-night level (Lden), as well as to elucidate the degree to which the acoustic indicator Intermittency Ratio (IR), which reflects the “eventfulness” of a noise situation, predicts noise annoyance. We conducted a mixed-mode representative population survey in a stratified random sample of 5592 residents exposed to transportation noise all over Switzerland. Source-specific noise exposure was calculated for each floor and each façade based on comprehensive traffic data. Noise annoyance was measured using the ICBEN 11-point scale. The survey was carried out in 4 waves at different times of the year. We hypothesized that in addition to Lden, the effects of noise on annoyance can be better explained when also considering the intensity of short-term variations of noise level over time. We therefore incorporated the acoustic indicator IR in the statistical models. For all noise sources, results revealed significant associations between Lden and %HA after controlling for confounders and independent predictors such as IR (measured over 24 h), exposure to other transportation noise sources, sex and age, language, home ownership, education level, living duration, temperature, and access to a quiet side of the dwelling. Aircraft noise annoyance scored markedly higher than annoyance to railway and road traffic noise at the same Lden level. Railway noise elicited higher percentages of highly annoyed persons than road traffic noise. Results furthermore suggest that for road traffic noise, IR has an additional effect on %HA and can explain shifts of the exposure-response curve of up to about 6 dB between low IR and high IR exposure situations, possibly due to the effect of different durations of noise-free intervals between events. For railway and aircraft noise annoyance, the predictive value of IR was limited. Keywords: Transportation noise, Annoyance, Exposure-response relationship, Noise metrichttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041201831897X |
| spellingShingle | Mark Brink Beat Schäffer Danielle Vienneau Maria Foraster Reto Pieren Ikenna C. Eze Christian Cajochen Nicole Probst-Hensch Martin Röösli Jean-Marc Wunderli A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise Environment International |
| title | A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise |
| title_full | A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise |
| title_fullStr | A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise |
| title_full_unstemmed | A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise |
| title_short | A survey on exposure-response relationships for road, rail, and aircraft noise annoyance: Differences between continuous and intermittent noise |
| title_sort | survey on exposure response relationships for road rail and aircraft noise annoyance differences between continuous and intermittent noise |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041201831897X |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT markbrink asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT beatschaffer asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT daniellevienneau asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT mariaforaster asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT retopieren asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT ikennaceze asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT christiancajochen asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT nicoleprobsthensch asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT martinroosli asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT jeanmarcwunderli asurveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT markbrink surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT beatschaffer surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT daniellevienneau surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT mariaforaster surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT retopieren surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT ikennaceze surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT christiancajochen surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT nicoleprobsthensch surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT martinroosli surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise AT jeanmarcwunderli surveyonexposureresponserelationshipsforroadrailandaircraftnoiseannoyancedifferencesbetweencontinuousandintermittentnoise |