“Highly Annoyed: One mark multiple meanings”

Eveline Maris

Leiden University

The Netherlands

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: maris@fsw.leidenuniv.nl

Leiden University The Netherlands

Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 15

Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 16

Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 17

Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 18

Young Researchers Workshop, 18th. IAPS conference, July 5-6, 2004, Vienna, Austria 19

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