Response to a change in transport noise exposure: competing explanations of change effects.
Annoyance response to a change in noise exposure appears to demonstrate an excess response relative to those predicted from exposure-response curves obtained under steady-state conditions. This change effect also appears to persist well after the change. Numerous explanations have been postulated for this phenomenon. This paper catalogs the different explanations and reviews the evidence for each. The evidence is of limited and variable quality but, while inadequate to endorse any one explanation, is sufficient to reject some notions and to identify a residual set of plausible explanations. These include two explanations based on modifiers of exposure-response relationships that potentially change between before and after conditions, an explanation based on differential response criteria of respondents chronically exposed to different steady-state levels of noise, and an explanation based on retention of coping strategies. All have ramifications for the assessment of human response (annoyance) where noise exposure changes, and some have wider implications for the interpretation of generalized exposure-response curves obtained in the steady state.
Brown
A L
AL
Urban Research Program, Griffith School of Environment, Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, Queensland 4111, Australia. lex.brown@griffith.edu.au
van Kamp
Irene
I
D000223:Adaptation, Psychological; D000339:Affect; D001290:Attitude; D015982:Bias; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006801:Humans; D008144:Loudness Perception; D008568:Memory; D009624:Noise, Transportation / Q000009:adverse effects*; D011571:Psychoacoustics; D011788:Quality of Life; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D013997:Time Factors