Hongisto Valtteri, Varjo Johanna, Oliva David, Haapakangas Annu, Benway Evan
Finnish Institute of Occupational HealthTurku, Finland.
Turku University of Applied SciencesTurku, Finland.
Front Psychol. 2017 Jul 18;8:1177. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01177. eCollection 2017.
A certain level of masking sound is necessary to control the disturbance caused by speech sounds in open-plan offices. The sound is usually provided with evenly distributed loudspeakers. Pseudo-random noise is often used as a source of artificial sound masking (PRMS). A recent laboratory experiment suggested that water-based masking sound (WBMS) could be more favorable than PRMS. The purpose of our study was to determine how the employees perceived different WBMSs compared to PRMS. The experiment was conducted in an open-plan office of 77 employees who had been accustomed to work under PRMS (44 dB ). The experiment consisted of five masking conditions: the original PRMS, four different WBMSs and return to the original PRMS. The exposure time of each condition was 3 weeks. The noise level was nearly equal between the conditions (43-45 dB ) but the spectra and the nature of the sounds were very different. A questionnaire was completed at the end of each condition. Acoustic satisfaction was worse during the WBMSs than during the PRMS. The disturbance caused by three out of four WBMSs was larger than that of PRMS. Several attributes describing the sound quality itself were in favor of PRMS. Colleagues' speech sounds disturbed more during WBMSs. None of the WBMSs produced better subjective ratings than PRMS. Although the first WBMS was equal with the PRMS for several variables, the overall results cannot be seen to support the use of WBMSs in office workplaces. Because the experiment suffered from some methodological weaknesses, conclusions about the adequacy of WBMSs cannot yet be drawn.
在开放式办公室中,需要一定程度的掩蔽声音来控制语音造成的干扰。这种声音通常由均匀分布的扬声器提供。伪随机噪声(PRMS)常被用作人工声音掩蔽的来源。最近的一项实验室实验表明,水基掩蔽声音(WBMS)可能比PRMS更具优势。我们研究的目的是确定与PRMS相比,员工如何感知不同的WBMS。实验在一个有77名员工的开放式办公室进行,这些员工习惯在PRMS(44分贝)环境下工作。实验包括五种掩蔽条件:原始的PRMS、四种不同的WBMS以及回到原始的PRMS。每种条件的暴露时间为3周。各条件下的噪声水平几乎相等(43 - 45分贝),但声音的频谱和性质差异很大。在每种条件结束时完成一份问卷。与PRMS期间相比,WBMS期间的声学满意度更差。四种WBMS中有三种造成的干扰比PRMS更大。几个描述声音质量本身的属性更有利于PRMS。在WBMS期间,同事的语音干扰更大。没有一种WBMS产生的主观评分比PRMS更好。尽管第一种WBMS在几个变量上与PRMS相当,但总体结果并不支持在办公场所使用WBMS。由于实验存在一些方法上的弱点,关于WBMS是否合适的结论尚未得出。