Activity as a Mediator Between Users and Their Auditory Environment in an Urban Pocket Park

Abstract

Sound is receiving increasing attention in urban planning and design due to its effects on human health and quality of life. Soundscape researchers have sought ecologically valid measures to describe and explain the complex relationship between people and their auditory environments, largely employing laboratory studies and neglecting the active role of activity. This chapter proposes a situated cognition approach to study the relationship between context, use of space, and the ways in which users describe and evaluate sounds and their auditory environments in an urban pocket park. It draws on empirical data gathered in Parc du Portugal in Montreal, Canada using a mixed-methods research design that integrates ethnographic observations, on-site questionnaires, and behavioral mapping using a geo-spatial app to offer a situated understanding of the human auditory experience in its full complexity, with an emphasis on the mediating role of activity on the user-auditory environment relationship.

Soundtracking the Public Space: Outcomes of the Musikiosk Soundscape Intervention

“…The World Health Organization, for example, strongly recommends an average road traffic noise level of below 53 decibels (dB) L den (see: ). Because of its location, the park hosts a diverse combination of peacefully overlapping users: recurrent users—elderly members of a Portuguese community who chat with each other from late afternoon through evening, employees from businesses nearby—and also passers-by (see [107] for more details). On the quiet(er) side of this park, a gazebo structure is located, which was chosen for the Musikiosk, because of the history of gazebos as local focal points for music performance, and because of the observed relative lack of use of side of the park.…”

Public Space Users’ Soundscape Evaluations in Relation to Their Activities. An Amsterdam-Based Study

“…Mixed methods approaches are common in soundscape research, as the complexity of people’s urban experiences cannot be fully grasped in mono-method studies (Bloomfield, 2014; Aletta et al, 2016a; Herranz-Pascual et al, 2017; Bild et al, 2018). They are conducive to a more nuanced, situated and integrated exploration of the relationship between users of public spaces and their soundscapes, in context (see also Knigge and Cope, 2006 with respect to the integration of qualitative and quantitative data).…”

“…In examining users’ evaluations of their soundscapes in urban public outdoor spaces, we rely on users’ activities as a key variable that can influence their evaluations, and, through that, the current and future use of the urban public space (see Nielbo et al, 2013; Steffens et al, 2017; Bild et al, 2018 for comparable approaches). With this in mind, this paper aims to understand the factors that can influence and moderate, both separately and together, how users of three different public spaces evaluate their soundscapes in relation to their on-site activities.…”

“…While the role of users’ activities as a variable potentially influencing their relationship with their soundscapes has been suggested before (Dubois, 2000; Lercher and Schulte-Fortkamp, 2003), the effective and explicit integration of activity in scientific research with a focus on urban public spaces is still in its incipient, exploratory phase (Aletta et al, 2016b; Bild et al, 2016, 2018; Lavia et al, 2016; Steffens et al, 2017). Most of these research projects arise from more practice-oriented questions, either dealing with specific soundscape interventions with some form of behavioral control in mind (see Lavia et al, 2012, 2016), or emphasizing the role users’ soundscapes play in relaxation or rehabilitation activities or in relation to auditory comfort, both indoors and outdoors (Mzali, 2002; Delepaut, 2009; Cerwén et al, 2016; Filipan et al, 2017).…”

“…Bild et al, 2018, for a detailed explanation of the behavioral mapping method and tools; see also Steele et al, 2016). …”