Home Email this page Print this page Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
Noise & Health  
 Next article
 Previous article
Table of Contents

Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Citation Manager
Access Statistics
Reader Comments
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded19    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2017  |  Volume : 19  |  Issue : 89  |  Page : 183--192

On-site and laboratory evaluations of soundscape quality in recreational urban spaces

1 Department of Civil Engineering, Technical University of , Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
2 Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of , Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
3 Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of , Kongens Lyngby; Department of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, and Audiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

Correspondence Address:
Sébastien Santurette
Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Ørsteds Plads 352, 2800 Kongens Lyngby
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/nah.NAH_109_16

Rights and Permissions

Context: Regulations for quiet urban areas are typically based on sound level limits alone. However, the nonacoustic context may be crucial for subjective soundscape quality. Aims: This study aimed at comparing the role of sound level and nonacoustic context for subjective urban soundscape assessment in the presence of the full on-site context, the visual context only, and without context. Materials and Methods: Soundscape quality was evaluated for three recreational urban spaces by using four subjective attributes: loudness, acceptance, stressfulness, and comfort. The sound level was measured at each site and simultaneous sound recordings were obtained. Participants answered questionnaires either on site or during laboratory listening tests, in which the sound recordings were presented with or without each site’s visual context consisting of two pictures. They rated the four subjective attributes along with their preference toward eight sound sources. Results: The sound level was found to be a good predictor of all subjective parameters in the laboratory, but not on site. Although all attributes were significantly correlated in the laboratory setting, they did not necessarily covary on site. Moreover, the availability of the visual context in the listening experiment had no significant effect on the ratings. The participants were overall more positive toward natural sound sources on site. Conclusion: The full immersion in the on-site nonacoustic context may be important when evaluating overall soundscape quality in urban recreational areas. Laboratory evaluations may not fully reflect how subjective loudness, acceptance, stressfulness, and comfort are affected by sound level.


Print this article     Email this article