This article reports two studies intended to develop and assess conceptual models of how different factors mediate and moderate the annoyance reaction in school environments. In the first, a survey of 207 pupils was conducted where assumptions about mediators and moderators were formulated and tested. In the best model, general sensitivity and adaptation led to a higher degree of annoyance causing stress symptoms. In the second study, focus group interviews with 16 pupils were performed to set up a model of mediating and moderating factors from pupils’statements in the formation of annoyance. The objectivewas also to get their opinions aboutways to improve the sound environment in school. The interviews indicated a serial arrangement in which stress symptoms and distraction mediated between chatter and disturbance. Thus, the two studies suggested different models for the prediction of the annoyance reaction. The pupils’ views about how to improve the school sound environment are discussed in the framework of an empowerment model.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baird, J. C., Harder, K., & Preis, A. (1997).Annoyance and community noise: Psychophysical model dose-response relationships. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 333-343.
2.
Bronzaft, A., & McCarthy, D. (1975).The effect of elevated train noise on reading ability. Environment and Behavior, 7, 517-527.
3.
Browne, M. W.,& Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternativeways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen& J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models(pp. 136-162). London: Sage.
4.
Conger, J. A.,& Kanungo, R. N. (1988).The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471-482.
5.
Evans, G. W., Bullinger, M., & Hygge, S. (1998).Chronic noise exposure and physiological response: A prospective study of children living under environmental stress. Psychological Science, 9, 75-77.
6.
Evans, G. W.,& Hygge, S. (in press). Noise and performance in children and adults. To appear in D. Prasher (Ed.), Handbook of Noise and Health.
7.
Guski, R. (1997). Conceptual, methodological, and dose-response problems related to annoyance and disturbance. In F. Augusztinovicz (Ed.) Proceedings of Inter-Noise 97, Vol. 2 (pp.1077-1082). Budapest, Hungary: OPAKFI.
8.
Guski, R. (1999).Personal and social variables as co-determinants of noise annoyance. Noise & Health, 3, 45-56.
9.
Haines, M. M., & Stansfeld, S. A. (2000). Measuring annoyance and health in child social surveys. In D. Cassereau (Eds). Proceedings of Inter-Noise 2000, Vol 3(pp. 1609-1614). Nice, France: Société Francais d’ Acoustique.
10.
Haines, M. M., Stansfeld, S., Job, R. F. S., Berglund, B.,& Head, J. (2001).Chronic noise exposure, stress responses, mental health, and cognitive performance in school children. Psychological Medicine, 31, 1385-1396.
11.
Hygge, S., Evans, G.W.,& Bullinger, M. (1993). The Munich airport noise study: Psychological, cognitive, and quality of life effects on children. In M. Vallet (Ed.), Noise as a public health problem. Proceeding of the 6th international Congress. (Vol. 3, pp. 301-308). Arcueil, France: Inrets.
12.
Job, R. F. S. (1999).Noise sensitivity as a factor influencing human reaction to noise. Noise & Health, 3, 57-68.
13.
Jöreskog, K. G.,& Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the Simplis command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.
14.
Kjellberg, A., Landström, U., Tesarz, M., Söderberg, L., & Åkerlund, E. (1996).The effects of nonphysical noise characteristics, ongoing task and noise sensitivity on annoyance and distraction due to noise at work. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 123-136.
15.
Kreuger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups. A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
16.
Landström, U., Kjellberg, A., Tesarz, M.,& Åkerlund, E. (1995).Exposure levels, tonal components, and noise annoyance in working environment. Environment International, 21, 265-275.
17.
Lundquist, P., Holmberg, K., & Landström, U. (2000).Annoyance and effects on work from environmental noise at school. Noise & Health, 8, 39-46.
18.
Passchier-Vermeer, W., & Passchier, W. F. (2000). Noise exposure and public health. Environmental Health Perspectives Supplements, 8(1), 123-132.
19.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
20.
Race, K. H., Hotch, D. F., & Packer, T. (1994). Rehabilitation program evaluation. Use of focus groups to empower clients. Evaluation Review, 18(6), 730-740.
21.
Rissel, C. (1994).Empowerment: The holy grail of health promotion. Health Promotion International, 9, 39-47.
22.
Stallen, P. J. M. (1999).A theoretical framework for environmental noise annoyance. Noise & Health, 3, 69-79.
23.
Stansfeld, S. A., Sharp, D. S., Gallacher, J.,& Babish, W. (1993). Road traffic noise, noise sensitivity, and psychological disorders. Psychological Medicine, 23(4), 977-985.
24.
Strauss, A.,& Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
25.
Swedish Ministry of Education and Science. (1994). Curriculum for the compulsory school, the pre-school class, and the after school centre (Article no. U99.013). Stockholm: National Agency for Education.
26.
Vaughn, S., Shay-Schumm, J., & Sinagub, J. (1996). Focus groups interviews in education and psychology. London: Sage.
27.
World Health Organization. (1980). Noise. Environmental health criteria, 12. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
28.
Wood-Charlesworth, L., & Rodwell, M. K. (1997).Focus groups with children: A resource for sexual abuse prevention program evaluation. Child Abuse & Neglect, 21, 1205-1216.
29.
Zimmerman, M. A., & Rappaport, J. (1988).Citizen participation, perceived control, and psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 725-750.
