Self-Report of Transportation Noise Exposure, Annoyance and Noise Sensitivity in Relation to Noise Map Information

Heinonen-Guzejev, Marja; Vuorinen, Heikki S.; Kaprio, Jaakko; Heikkilä, Kauko; Mussalo‐Rauhamaa, Helena; Koskenvuo, Markku

doi:10.1006/jsvi.1999.2885

Cited by 28 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The expected positive relationship between noise sensitivity and noise annoyance is evident for all but two samples: The Non-Motorway and Non-Airport samples. Heinonen-Guzejev et al [ 41 ] compared self-reported measures of noise annoyance and noise sensitivity against information on noise maps in the Metropolitan Area of Helsinki, Finland. They reported that transportation-induced annoyance was higher among individuals with higher noise sensitivity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Negative Affect Hypothesis of Noise Sensitivity

Shepherd

Heinonen-Guzejev

Heikkilä

et al. 2015

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some studies indicate that noise sensitivity is explained by negative affect, a dispositional tendency to negatively evaluate situations and the self. Individuals high in such traits may report a greater sensitivity to other sensory stimuli, such as smell, bright light and pain. However, research investigating the relationship between noise sensitivity and sensitivity to stimuli associated with other sensory modalities has not always supported the notion of a common underlying trait, such as negative affect, driving them. Additionally, other explanations of noise sensitivity based on cognitive processes have existed in the clinical literature for over 50 years. Here, we report on secondary analyses of pre-existing laboratory (n = 74) and epidemiological (n = 1005) data focusing on the relationship between noise sensitivity to and annoyance with a variety of olfactory-related stimuli. In the first study a correlational design examined the relationships between noise sensitivity, noise annoyance, and perceptual ratings of 16 odors. The second study sought differences between mean noise and air pollution annoyance scores across noise sensitivity categories. Results from both analyses failed to support the notion that, by itself, negative affectivity explains sensitivity to noise.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Negative Affect Hypothesis of Noise Sensitivity

Shepherd

Heinonen-Guzejev

Heikkilä

et al. 2015

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among those that replied were 594 same-sexed twin pairs -137 MZ twin pairs and 457 DZ twin pairs. For 573 twin pairs (131 MZ and 442 DZ), both twins had answered the question on noise sensitivity (Heinonen-Guzejev et al, 2000). Heinonen-Guzejev et al, 2000).…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For 573 twin pairs (131 MZ and 442 DZ), both twins had answered the question on noise sensitivity (Heinonen-Guzejev et al, 2000). Heinonen-Guzejev et al, 2000). Of all respondents, 38.4% were noise-sensitive (high or quite high noise sensitivity), of which 52.5% were women.…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is more likely related to a disposition to react to noise in general rather than to the physical properties of noise (Nivison, 1992). Noise sensitivity has been found to be independent of noise level (Heinonen-Guzejev et al, 2000;Lopez Barrio & Carles, 1993). Noise sensitivity is not merely synonymous with peripheral auditory acuity but it is a function of a more central process (Moreira & Bryan, 1972).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic Component of Noise Sensitivity

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Noise is one of the main externalities produced by road traffic; apart from a generic impact on the quality of life, traffic noise may produce serious effects on human health, annoyance and sleep disturbance. These effects have been extensively studied and reported [1][2][3][4][5][6][7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of urban traffic plans on noise abatement: a case study

Gallo¹,

Luca²,

Martinis³

2014

The Sustainable City IX

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traffic noise is a significant externality in urban areas that reduces the quality of life and may produce non-negligible effects on human health. The main factor responsible for traffic noise is individual transportation (cars and motorcycles) and the more congested the urban network, the higher the average level of traffic noise. An Urban Traffic Plan (UTP) is a tool for managing the urban mobility; in Italy the UTP is provided for under national laws and one of its objectives is noise abatement. The UTP manages the network (road directions, signal settings, etc.) without providing new infrastructures. In this paper, we test the effectiveness of UTPs in terms of noise abatement on a real case: the Urban Traffic Plan of Benevento. In this paper, we compare the estimated equivalent noise levels in several points of the town for the current scenario and for the (final) design scenario. Initial results show that, in order to evaluate the actual effectiveness of the UTP vis-à-vis traffic noise, some more comprehensive indicators have to be proposed: evaluating traffic noise reduction only in some points of the network cannot yield clear-cut results.

show abstract

Self-Report of Transportation Noise Exposure, Annoyance and Noise Sensitivity in Relation to Noise Map Information

Cited by 28 publications

References 23 publications

The Negative Affect Hypothesis of Noise Sensitivity

The Negative Affect Hypothesis of Noise Sensitivity

Genetic Component of Noise Sensitivity

The effects of urban traffic plans on noise abatement: a case study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About