The associations between noise sensitivity, reported physical and mental health, perceived environmental quality, and noise annoyance

Schreckenberg, Dirk; Griefahn, Barbara; Meis, Markus

doi:10.4103/1463-1741.59995

Cited by 117 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Annoyance and sleep disturbance mediated the effects of NS on health. Schreckenberg et al, [66] concluded that NS people were more critical of their environmental quality, in particular with regard to air traffic. This phenomenon was earlier referred to by Weinstein as "critical tendency."…”

Section: Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noise and health in vulnerable groups: A review

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vulnerable or susceptible groups are mentioned in most reviews and documents regarding noise and health. But only a few studies address this issue in a concrete and focused way. Groups at risk most often mentioned in the literature are children, the elderly, the chronically ill and people with a hearing impairment. The other categories encountered are those of sensitive persons, shiftworkers, people with mental illness (e.g., schizophrenia or autism), people suffering from tinnitus, and fetuses and neonates. The mechanism for this vulnerability has not been clearly described and relevant research has seldom focused on the health effects of noise in these groups in an integrated manner. This paper summarizes the outcomes and major conclusions of a systematic, qualitative review of studies over the past 5 years. This review was prepared for the 10 th Conference on Noise as a Public Health Problem (ICBEN, 2011). Evidence is reviewed describing effects, groups assumed to be at risk, and mechanisms pertaining to noise sensitivity and learned helplessness.

show abstract

Section: Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noise and health in vulnerable groups: A review

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Geurs and Van Wee, 2004). Moreover they differ in the way they perceive nuisance; studies looking into the relation between noise exposure and noise annoyance often fail to find a one-toone relationship (Job, 1988;Schreckenberg et al, 2010;Zimmer and Ellermeier, 1999;Miedema and Vos, 1999). Because of this notion, studies often conclude that subjective evaluations have more explanatory power (e.g.…”

Section: Accessibility Nuisance and Residential Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Residential satisfaction close to highways: The impact of accessibility, nuisances and highway adjustment projects

Hamersma

Tillema

Sussman

et al. 2014

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we focus on gaining insight into the residential satisfaction of households near highways, based on survey data collected among 1,225 respondents in the Netherlands living within 1,000 meters from a highway. Ordinal regression was used to study the impact of highway externalities on residential satisfaction. Moreover, we gained first insights into the reactions of people on highway adjustment projects, by studying people's expectations towards residential satisfaction as a consequence of the project with use of a multinomial logistic regression analysis. On average, 85 percent of respondents reported being satisfied with living near a highway. Regarding explanatory characteristics, subjective evaluations of air and noise nuisance and of accessibility are of comparable importance and seem to outperform objective exposure calculations or distance from the highway or access lane in explaining residential satisfaction. Moreover highway interest is directly reflected in a higher satisfaction. However, other factors such as neighborhood design, traffic safety and social cohesion are important as well. People react differently to highway adjustment plans, negative expectations being highly driven by current negative feelings towards nuisance, and positive expectations by personal interest in accessibility and a positive attitude towards cars. An important implication could be the notion that exposure is not the same as perceived nuisance, which may give reason to be cautious when making transportation planning decisions based solely on calculations. In addition, the finding that other (neighborhood) factors are also very important in explaining residential satisfaction is interesting when thinking about compensating for the negative effects of a highway in the neighborhood. Also, the results regarding reactions to an announced highway adjustment project might be used to better adjust the planning process to the characteristics of the residents in the area. Further research is necessary to deepen the results, for example through the addition of other road project locations, interviews and longitudinal data.Keywords: highway infrastructure planning, accessibility, nuisance, residential satisfaction, planned highway adjustment projects. Highlights We studied the impact of negative (nuisance) and positive (accessibility) highway externalities and a highway adjustment project on residential satisfaction near highways.  Perceived nuisance and accessibility influence residential satisfaction, but other neighborhood factors are also important.  Perceptions of accessibility and nuisance outweigh objective measures (exposure levels, distance from highway/accesslane).  Highway users show a higher satisfaction level.  Expectations towards highway adjustment projects are mixed; highway users and people who like driving in particular have more positive expectations, currently hindered people more negative expectations.3

show abstract

“…Page 9 Not everyone will be affected in the same way by noise. Schreckenberg et al (2010) investigated the impact of environmental noise upon individuals who were noise-sensitive compared to those who were not. Their study found that noise exposure did not necessarily determine mental health effects, but rather noise annoyance was a predictor; noise sensitivity was found to influence noise annoyance.…”

Section: Noise Stress and Health Care Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of noise in clinical environments with particular reference to mental health care: A narrative review

Brown

Rutherford

Crawford

2015

International Journal of Nursing Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere is a large literature suggesting that noise can be detrimental to health and numerous policy documents have promoted noise abatement in clinical settings. ObjectivesThis paper documents the role of noise in clinical environments and its deleterious effects with a particular focus on mental health care. Our intention however, is to go beyond the notion that noise is simply undesirable and examine the extent to which researchers have explored the meaning of sound in hospital settings and identify new opportunities for research and practice. Data sources and review methodsThis is a narrative review which has grouped the literature and issues in the field into themes concerning the general issues of noise in health care; sleep noise and hospital environments; noise in intensive care units; implications for service users and staff; and suggestions for new ways of conceptualising and researching clinical soundscapes. Data sources comprised relevant UK policy documents and the results of a literature search of Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Knowledge using terms such as noise, health, hospital, soundscape and relevant additional terms derived from the papers retrieved. In addition the references of retrieved articles were scanned for additional relevant material and historical items significant in shaping the field. ResultsExcess unwanted noise can clearly be detrimental to health and impede recovery, and this is clearly recognised by policymakers especially in the UK context. We use the literature surveyed to argue that it is important also to see the noise in clinical environments in terms of the meaning it conveys and rather than merely containing unwanted sound, clinical environments have a 'soundscape'. This comprises noises which convey meaning, for example about the activities of other people, the rhythms of the day and the nature of the auditory community of the hospital. Unwanted sound may have unwanted effects, especially on those who are most vulnerable, yet this does not necessarily mean that silence is the better option.Page 2 Therefore it is our contention that it is important to begin thinking about the social functions of sound in the mental health environment. ConclusionsWhilst it can be stressful, sound can also be soothing, reassuring and a rich source of information about the environment as well. It may be used to secure a degree of privacy for oneself, to exclude others or as a source of solidarity among friends and colleagues. The challenge then is to understand the work that sound does in its ecological context in health care settings.

show abstract

The associations between noise sensitivity, reported physical and mental health, perceived environmental quality, and noise annoyance

Cited by 117 publications

References 44 publications

Noise and health in vulnerable groups: A review

Noise and health in vulnerable groups: A review

Residential satisfaction close to highways: The impact of accessibility, nuisances and highway adjustment projects

The role of noise in clinical environments with particular reference to mental health care: A narrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About