Situational and person-related factors influencing momentary and retrospective soundscape evaluations in day-to-day life.

Soundscape research draws on both experiments conducted in laboratory settings and studies in the field to explore peoples' perception and understanding of their acoustic environments. One opportunity to combine the strength of both approaches is the so-called Experience Sampling Method (ESM). This method was used to investigate the influence of situational and person-related variables on soundscape evaluations. Further, the relationship between momentary and retrospective soundscape judgments was explored. In the course of the 7-day ESM study, 32 participants were prompted ten times per day by a smartphone application to evaluate their soundscape and report on situational factors. Additionally, they performed summary retrospective judgments evaluating the whole of each day and their whole week. Upon completion, an exit interview probed personality traits (e.g., Big Five, information processing styles). Results revealed that both situational and person-related factors significantly contributed to the judgments of three soundscape dimensions (pleasantness, eventfulness, familiarity). Retrospective judgments of soundscape pleasantness were not only the average of the momentary judgments, but were also affected by the peak moment, the linear trend of the experience, and a person's mood while performing the judgment. Hence, the study provides valuable insights into the complex structure of momentary and retrospective soundscape evaluations.

[1]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  The ecology of adolescent activity and experience , 1977, Journal of youth and adolescence.

[2]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Multimodel Inference , 2004 .

[3]  W. Ellermeier,et al.  Psychoacoustic correlates of individual noise sensitivity. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  B. Berglund,et al.  A principal components model of soundscape perception. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  B. Hommel,et al.  Intentional control of attention: action planning primes action-related stimulus dimensions , 2007, Psychological research.

[6]  D. Kahneman,et al.  When More Pain Is Preferred to Less: Adding a Better End , 1993 .

[7]  Massimiliano Masullo,et al.  Immersive virtual reality and environmental noise assessment: An innovative audio-visual approach , 2013 .

[8]  Shan Jiang,et al.  Clustering daily patterns of human activities in the city , 2012, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

[9]  Drazen Prelec,et al.  Preferences for sequences of outcomes. , 1993 .

[10]  Paul Rozin,et al.  The Feeling of Music Past: How Listeners Remember Musical Affect , 2004 .

[11]  Don Knox,et al.  Experience sampling: Assessing urban soundscapes using in-situ participatory methods , 2017 .

[12]  Edward B. Royzman,et al.  Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and Contagion , 2001 .

[13]  S A Stansfeld,et al.  The development of Weinstein's noise sensitivity scale. , 2006, Noise & health.

[14]  J. Patton,et al.  Factor structure of the Barratt impulsiveness scale. , 1995, Journal of clinical psychology.

[15]  N. Galwey.  Introduction to Mixed Modelling: Beyond Regression and Analysis of Variance , 2006 .

[16]  Klaus Genuit,et al.  The acoustical diary as an innovative tool in soundscape evaluation , 2004 .

[17]  O. John,et al.  Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German , 2007 .

[18]  N. Draper,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis: Draper/Applied Regression Analysis , 1998 .

[19]  Kevin J. Williams,et al.  USING SIGNAL‐CONTINGENT EXPERIENCE SAMPLING METHODOLOGY TO STUDY WORK IN THE FIELD: A DISCUSSION AND ILLUSTRATION EXAMINING TASK PERCEPTIONS AND MOOD , 1993 .

[20]  D. Västfjäll.  Influences of Current Mood and Noise Sensitivity on Judgments of Noise Annoyance , 2002 .

[21]  Mandeep K. Dhami,et al.  The role of representative design in an ecological approach to cognition. , 2004, Psychological bulletin.

[22]  Catherine Lavandier,et al.  A sound judgment depending on the urban visual setting , 1999 .

[23]  Shoshana Shiloh,et al.  Individual differences in rational and intuitive thinking styles as predictors of heuristic responses and framing effects , 2002 .

[24]  Daniel Västfjäll.  The “end effect” in retrospective sound quality evaluation , 2004 .

[25]  Wolfgang Ellermeier,et al.  Temporal weights in the level discrimination of time-varying sounds. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Dirk Schreckenberg,et al.  The associations between noise sensitivity, reported physical and mental health, perceived environmental quality, and noise annoyance. , 2010, Noise & health.

[27]  E. Barratt,et al.  Psychiatric aspects of impulsivity. , 2001, The American journal of psychiatry.

[28]  N. Draper,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis , 1966 .

[29]  J. Steffens,et al.  Trend Effects in Momentary and Retrospective Soundscape Judgments , 2015 .

[30]  Catherine Guastavino,et al.  Categorization of environmental sounds. , 2007, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[31]  D. Ariely,et al.  Gestalt characteristics of experiences: the defining features of summarized events , 2000 .

[32]  E. Diener,et al.  Experience Sampling: Promises and Pitfalls, Strengths and Weaknesses , 2003 .