Borsky P N
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1979 Aug;12(3):521-35.
Community noise is reported to be the most often mentioned undesirable neighborhood condition in a recent U.S. Census survey. Understanding community response to noise involves the measurement of a number of complex acoustic and nonacoustic variables and establishing the chain of relationships between physical exposure, perception, annoyance, and acceptability responses and finally complaint behavior. The perceived loudness of a noise is the most important acoustic parameter influencing annoyance and complaints, and the simple dBA unit can be used to integrate spectral characteristics of complex sounds in community studies. Although energy averaging such as Leq or Ldn can be used to describe multiple noise exposures over time, the variable trade-off relationships between number and level of exposures are somewhat obscured by such summary measures. However, they are still the best available descriptors and, until more accurate ones are developed, can be used to measure community noise environments. Perception of an identical noise exposure can vary according to the physiological noise sensitivity of a person and the activity context in which the noise is heard. Although the acoustic quality of the noise itself usually explains about 10 to 25 per cent of the variability in annoyance responses, sociopsychological variables measured in field studies account for 35 to 50 per cent of the variations in human annoyance responses. Three of the most important nonacoustic factors are the connotative fear effects of the noise signal, the feeling that those responsible for the noise are misfeasant in not reducing the noise, and the feeling that harmful health effects are produced by the noise. When residents report great fear, a high misfeasance, and marked health effects, about 90 per cent report a high annoyance level whether their noise exposure level is above 90 Ldn or 65 to 70 Ldn. In contrast, if the feelings are a low fear level, a low degree of misfeasance, and minimal health effects, only 3 to 10 per cent give high annoyance responses. Complaint behavior, although based on intensity of annoyance, is modified by a number of other sociopsychological factors and often is an unreliable indicator of an environmental problem.
在美国最近的一次人口普查调查中，社区噪音被报告为最常被提及的不良邻里状况。了解社区对噪音的反应涉及测量许多复杂的声学和非声学变量，并建立物理暴露、感知、烦恼和可接受性反应以及最终投诉行为之间的关系链。噪音的感知响度是影响烦恼和投诉的最重要声学参数，简单的dBA单位可用于在社区研究中整合复杂声音的频谱特征。虽然诸如Leq或Ldn之类的能量平均可用于描述一段时间内的多次噪音暴露，但此类汇总测量会在一定程度上掩盖暴露次数与水平之间的可变权衡关系。然而，它们仍然是现有的最佳描述符，并且在开发出更准确的描述符之前，可用于测量社区噪音环境。对相同噪音暴露的感知可能因个人的生理噪音敏感度以及听到噪音的活动背景而异。虽然噪音本身的声学质量通常可解释烦恼反应中约10%至25%的变异性，但实地研究中测量的社会心理变量占人类烦恼反应变异性的35%至50%。三个最重要的非声学因素是噪音信号的隐含恐惧效应、认为造成噪音的人在不降低噪音方面存在不当行为的感觉，以及认为噪音会产生有害健康影响的感觉。当居民报告高度恐惧、高不当行为和明显的健康影响时，无论他们的噪音暴露水平是高于90 Ldn还是65至70 Ldn，约90%的人报告高度烦恼。相比之下，如果感觉恐惧程度低、不当行为程度低且健康影响最小，只有3%至10%的人会给出高度烦恼的反应。投诉行为虽然基于烦恼程度，但会受到许多其他社会心理因素的影响，并且通常是环境问题的不可靠指标。
