Abstract
Meta-analyses of social survey findings on source-specificity of annoyance indicate that the prevalence of annoyance attributable to aircraft noise may be somewhat greater than the prevalence of annoyance attributable to noise produced by surface traffic of similar cumulative level. Likewise, the prevalence of annoyance induced by impulsive noise may differ from that of general transportation noise of similar level. But how annoyed are people who live next to highways that happen to be located near runway ends by the combination of aircraft and surface traffic noise? How annoyed are people who live next to railroad tracks that pass by shooting ranges? One approach to modeling the total annoyance engendered by exposure to multiple noise sources has been to assume that the interactions among source-specific annoyances are negligible, so that total annoyance can be expressed as some form of summation of individual source-specific annoyances. This simplifying assumption may not always be warranted, nor is it often the case that social and physical measurements yield data precise enough to reliably distinguish among alternate summation hypotheses. Policy-related interpretations of the findings of studies of combined annoyance of noises of differing origin should thus be viewed with a healthy skepticism.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
