Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 2
Research problem
- Problem of noise omnipresent
- Abatement strategies address dB’s
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 3
Annoyance Question
In how far does the sound annoy you?
1=not at all (…) 7=extremely
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 4
Prevalence of consequential degree of annoyance at various average levels of transportation sound exposure (Ldn) as observed at 453 sites (Source: Fidell, 1992).
Day-Night Average Sound Level, dB
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f re
spo
nd
en
ts H
igh
ly A
nn
oye
d b
y n
ois
e
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 5
Research problem- Problem of noise omnipresent- Abatement strategies address dB’s
- Annoyance is correlated with nonacoustic factors- Is abatement via nonacoustics possible?
Q: Are (social) nonacoustic factors a contributory cause of noise annoyance?
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 6
Social nonacoustic factors
• Man-made sound: “You expose Me”
• Social Context:= Relational aspects of exposure situation– An aspect of social context is Procedure– A quality/characteristic of procedure is Fairness
• Theory of Social Justice (e.g. Tyler & Lind, 1992)
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 7
SOUND
SOCIAL SETTING
External processes Internal processes (physical & social) (psychological)
The Model
Disturbance
Control
Annoyance(stress)
+
-
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 8
Research Questions• Do social nonacoustical factors have a causal
relationship with noise annoyance?
– > Unfair exposure procedures cause an increase in annoyance
• Does the influence of social nonacoustical factors depend on sound level?
– > The fair procedure effect is moderated by sound level
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 9
Experiment (1)
• Prerequisites– The noise should cause annoyance– Disturbance of activity is important aspect of
annoyance
all subjects same activity
activity that is likely disturbed by sound– Manipulation of fairness strong link between
source and subject, and linked with sound itself
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 10
Experiment (2)
• 2 x 2 Design• Fairness (Y / N) vs. Loudness (50 dB / 70 dB)
• Manipulation of fairness and sound • 15 minutes exposure during reading task
• Dependents: • Annoyance (after 1 minute, after 15 minutes)• Disturbance • Perceived Control
• Population: 76 students
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 11
Experiment (3)
• Flow of experiment– Cover story: noise & performance
– Frame of reference for sound level
– Fairness: being asked to express preference which was said to be taken into account where possible
– Task: internal motivation to perform (exam), identical for all participants
– Annoyance question after 1 minute of exposure and directly after end of reading task (15 minutes)
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 12
ANOVA effect of acoustical factor
Perceived Loudness
sound condition
highlow
Est
ima
ted
Ma
rgin
al M
ea
ns
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
voice condition
voice
no voice
Annoyance (3 items)
sound condition
HIGH (70 dB LAeq)LOW (50 dB LAeq)
Est
ima
ted
Ma
rgin
al M
ea
ns
6.0
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.4
Fairness Y/N
FAIR
NOT FAIR
5.7
4.6
5.2
4.7
Main effect Fair (n.s.)
Main effect Sound F(1,72)=9.42 p=.003 η²=.12
Sound*Fair (n.s.) (obs.power .17)
With covariate:Sound*Fairness
F(1,68)=5.9 p=.018 η²= .079
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 13
Conclusions
• The fairness of procedure can have a causal effect on annoyance with noise
• The influence of procedural fairness on noise annoyance depends on sound level
• Abatement policy makers should be aware of possible effects of procedural fairness
Thank you for your attention.
For a written version of this presentation, please send e-mail to: [email protected]
Leiden University The Netherlands
Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 20
Future experiments
• Within-subjects manipulation of social context / fairness
• Social relationship between subjects• ‘History’ of social relationship
– Several trials– Description of earlier situations/procedures
• Social identity: value similaritym, trust• Change of eta² over time