A Review of Socio-acoustic Surveys for Soundscape Studies
- 259 Downloads
Purpose of Review
This article reviews the literature and presents the current status of the use of socio-acoustic surveys in soundscape studies, through the indication of appropriate question formats, types, and topics for each data collection method (soundwalks, interviews, listening tests, and focus group) for the involved public and acoustic stimuli.
The ISO 12913-2 establishes ways of data collection and reporting requirements for soundscape studies (International Organization for Standartization 2017), including the triangulation technique. This standard recommends some data collection methods, like soundwalks and interviews. Even so, some authors are using different methods to collect data, such as focus group and listening tests.
This study investigated through 52 peer-reviewed papers published on the last 20 years the current status of socio-acoustic studies regarding question topics and types, used stimuli, and characteristics about the participants, using the four major adopted data collection methods in soundscape studies: soundwalks, interviews, listening tests, and focus group. Some topics like “soundscape quality” and “sound sources identification and evaluation” are common in the recent studies, as well as the adoption of some question types such as semantic differential scale, the staple scale, and ranking order scale.
KeywordsSoundscape Socio-acoustic survey Soundwalks Interviews Listening tests
The authors also would like to thank the reviewers for the nice suggestions and recommendations, as well as the editor of the section Noise Pollution, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Paulo Henrique Trombetta Zannin, for the kind invitation to submit this manuscript to the Journal Current Pollution Reports.
The authors received financing scholarships from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior/Programa Ciências sem Fronteiras (CAPES—Brazil’s National Coordination of Personal Improvement on Superior Level/Science Without Borders Program) and the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD—German Academic Exchange Service).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- 1.Schafer RM. The soundscape: our sonic environment and the tuning of the world. Inner Traditions/ Bear & Co; 1977.Google Scholar
- 2.Brown L, Gjestaland T, Dubois D. Acoustic environments and soundscapes. In: Kang J, Schulte-Fortkamp B, editors. Soundscape and the built environment. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016.Google Scholar
- 3.Axelsson Ö. The ISO 12913 series on soundscape. In Proceedings Forum Acusticum, Aalborg, Denmark: 1985–1987; 2011.Google Scholar
- 4.Thompson E. The soundscape of modernity: architectural acoustics and the culture of listening in America 1900–1933. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2002.Google Scholar
- 5.Schulte-Fortkamp B, Dubois D. Recent advances in soundscape research. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 92(6):v–viii.Google Scholar
- 6.Davies WJ, Adams MD, Bruce NS, Cain R, Carlyle A, Cusdack P, Hume KI, Jennings P, Plack CJ. The positive soundscape project. In Proceedings 19th International Congress on Acoustics Madrid, 2–7 September 2007.Google Scholar
- 8.COST TUD Action TD0804. Soundscape of European cities and landscapes. In: Kang J, Chourmouziadou K, Skantamis K, Wang B, Hao Y, editors. Soundscape-COST. Oxford: UK; 2013.Google Scholar
- 10.Kang J. Urban sound environment. Oxon: Taylor & Francis; 2007.Google Scholar
- 11.International Organization for Standardization. ISO 12913-1:2014 Acoustics – Soundscape – part I: definition and conceptual framework. Geneva: ISO; 2014.Google Scholar
- 13.International Organization for Standartization. ISO 12913-2:2017 Acoustics – Soundscape – part 2: data collection and reporting requirements. Geneva: ISO; 2017.Google Scholar
- 16.Kang J. Acoustic simulation and comfort in urban open public spaces. Sub-final report for European Commission project RUROS—rediscovering the urban realm and open spaces, School of Architecture, University of Sheffield, UK; 2004.Google Scholar
- 17.Guski R. Psychological methods for evaluating sound quality and assessing acoustic information. Acustica United Acta Acustica. 1997;83:765–74.Google Scholar
- 21.Adams M, Bruce N, Davies W, Cain R, Jennings P, Carlyle A, et al. Soundwalking as methodology for understanding soundscapes. Proc Inst Acoust. 2008;30(2):548–54.Google Scholar
- 22.Susini P, Lemaitre G, McAdams S. Psychological measurement for sound description and evaluation. In: Berglund B, Rossi GB, Townsend JT, Pendrill LR, editors. Measurement with persons: theory, methods, and implementation areas. New York: Psychology Press; 2012. p. 222–53.Google Scholar
- 23.International Organization for Standardization. ISO/TS 15666: 2003 Acoustics—assessment of noise annoyance by means of social and socio-acoustic surveys. Geneva: ISO; 2003.Google Scholar
- 24.Simmons C. Developing a uniform questionnaire for socio-acoustic surveys in residential buildings. In Rasmussen B, Machimbarrena M, editors. COST Action TU0901: integrating and harmonizing sound insulation aspects in sustainable urban housing constructions building acoustics throughout Europe. Volume 1: towards a common framework in building acoustics throughout Europe. COST; 2014.Google Scholar
- 26.Schafer RM. The music of the environment. Vienna: Universal Edition; 1973.Google Scholar
- 27.Augoyard JF. Pas à pas: Essai sur le cheminement quotidien en milieu urbain. Paris: Seuil; 1979.Google Scholar
- 28.Staṥko-Mazur K. Soundwalk as a multifaceted practice. Argument Biannual Philos J. 2015;5(2):439–55.Google Scholar
- 29.Schafer RM. The new soundscape: a handbook for the modern music teacher. Don Mills: BMI Canada; 1969.Google Scholar
- 32.Semidor C. Listening to a city with the soundwalk method. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(August):959–64.Google Scholar
- 34.Fiebig A. Acoustic environments and their perception measured by the soundwalk method. In proceedings Inter-Noise, San Francisco, USA; 2015.Google Scholar
- 35.Fiebig A, Herweg A. The measurement of soundscapes: a study of methods and their implications. In Proceedings Inter-Noise, Hong Kong, China; 2017.Google Scholar
- 36.Bassarab R, Sharp B, Robinette B. An updated catalog of 628 social surveys of residents’ reaction to environmental noise (1943–2008). Arlington: Wyle Laboratories; 2009.Google Scholar
- 49.Guastavino C, Katz BFG, Polack JD, Levitin DJ, Dubois D. Ecological validity of soundscape reproduction. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2005;91(2):333–41.Google Scholar
- 57.DeFranzo S.E. 5 Examples of survey demographic questions. 2018. https://www.snapsurveys.com/blog/5-survey-demographic-question-examples/.
- 58.Brace I. Questionnaire design: how to plan, structure and write survey material for effective market research. 2nd ed. Kogan Page: Market Research in Practice; 2008.Google Scholar
- 59.Engel RJ, Schutt RK. The practice of research in social work. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2013.Google Scholar
- 60.Cargan L. Doing social research. Lanham: Rowman & Littelfield Publishers, Inc.; 2007. p. 93.Google Scholar
- 61.Lewis-Beck MS, Bryman A, Liao TF. The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods, vol. 1: Thousand Oaks; 2004. p. 128.Google Scholar
- 62.UNSW Teaching. Assessing by multiple choice questions. 2018. https://teaching.unsw.edu.au/assessing-multiple-choice-questions.
- 63.Wrenn B, Stevens RE, Loudon DL. Marketing research: text and cases. 2nd ed. Binghamton: Best Business Books; 2007.Google Scholar
- 64.Osgood CE, George J, Percy S. The measurement of meaning. Illinois: Ninth printing; 1975.Google Scholar
- 65.Loring K, Stewart A, Ritter P, González V, Laurent D, Lynch J. Outcome measures for education and other health care interventions. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 1996.Google Scholar
- 66.Mooi E, Sarstedt M, Mooi-Reci I. Market research: the process data, and methods using stata: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd; 2018.Google Scholar
- 67.Mangal SK, Mangal S. Research methodology in behavioral sciences. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited; 2013.Google Scholar
- 68.Madu CN. Statistics as easy as 1,2,3! with Microsoft ® Excel for Windows. CT: Chi Publishers Fairfield; 2003.Google Scholar
- 69.McNabb DE. Research methods in public administration and nonprofit management: quantitative and qualitative approaches. 2nd ed. New York: M.E. Sharpe; 2008.Google Scholar
- 70.Sevilla CG, Ochave JA, Punsalan TG, Regala BP, Uriarte GG. Research methods: Rex Book Store; 1992.Google Scholar
- 71.Wreeb B, Robert E, Stevens DL. Marketing research: text and cases—second edition. Binghamton: Best Business Books; 2007.Google Scholar
- 72.Philips PP, Philips JJ, Aaron B. Survey basics. Alexandria: ASTD; 2013.Google Scholar
- 73.QuestionPro. Popular survey questions with survey examples and sample survey. 2018. https://www.questionpro.com/article/survey-question-answer-type.html#The_Dichotomous_Survey_Questions.
- 74.Mitchell ML, Jolley JM. Research design explained. 8th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth CENAGE Learning; 2013.Google Scholar
- 75.Erwin P. Attitudes and persuasion. East Sussex: Psychology Press; 2001.Google Scholar
- 76.Jackson SL. Research methods: a modular approach. Stamford: CENGAGE Learning; 2011.Google Scholar
- 85.Berglund B, Nilsson ME. On a tool for measuring soundscape quality in urban residential areas. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(2):938–44.Google Scholar
- 94.Raimbault M. Qualitative judgments of urban soundscapes: questioning questionnaires and semantic scales. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(2):929–37.Google Scholar
- 95.Schulte-Fortkamp B, Fiebig A. Soundscape analysis in a residential area: an evaluation of noise and people’s mind. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):875–80.Google Scholar
- 96.Nilsson ME, Berglund B. Soundscape quality in suburban green areas and city parks. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):903–11.Google Scholar
- 98.Guastavino C. The ideal urban soundscape: investigating the sound quality of French cities. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):945–51.Google Scholar
- 100.Coensel BD, Botteldooren D. The quiet rural soundscape and how to characterize it. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):887–97.Google Scholar
- 101.Brambilla G, Maffei L. Responses to noise in urban parks and in rural quiet areas. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):881–6.Google Scholar
- 108.Hatfield J, van Kamp I, Job RFS. Clarifying “soundscapes”: effects of question format on reaction to noise from combined sources. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):922–8.Google Scholar
- 110.Lavandier C, Defréville B. The contribution of sound source characteristics in the assessment of urban soundscapes. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2006;92(6):912–21.Google Scholar
- 112.Weelankavil JP. International business research: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2007.Google Scholar