Humans are subjected to noise in many occupational, military, transportation, recreational, and other settings, sometimes with attendant ill effects. Some noises may pose the threat of inducing hearing loss; most noises compromise one's ability to hear signals and other desirable sounds, as well as to communicate via speech. In this chapter, we review the role of noise in human hearing impairment and its effects on signal audibility and speech intelligibility, task performance, and nonauditory responses. Particular emphasis is paid to the needs of the human factors/ergonomics practitioner who is confronted with the objective of protecting individuals' hearing in noise, designing signals so that they are audible and recognizable, and in general, optimizing the use of the auditory sense under poor acoustic conditions. In addition to providing guidance and consensus standards for auditory danger signal design, we provide a review of new technologies in augmented hearing protection. These technologies are aimed at protecting the user's hearing in noise from injury while affording improved audibility for certain applications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenC. H.BergerE. H. (1990). Development of a unique passive hearing protector with level-dependent and flat attenuation characteristics. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 34(3), 97–105.
2.
ANSI S3.19–1974. Method for the measurement of real-ear protection of hearing protectors and physical attenuation of earmuffs. New York: American National Standards Institute.
3.
ANSI S1.4–1983 (R2001). Specification for sound level meters. New York: American National Standards Institute.
4.
ANSI S3.2–1989. American National Standard methods for measuring the intelligibility of speech over communications systems. New York: American National Standards Institute.
5.
ANSI S1.1–1994 (R2004). Acoustical terminology. New York: American National Standards Institute.
6.
ANSI S12.42–1995.Microphone-in-real-ear and acoustic test fixture methods for the measurement of insertion loss of circumaural hearing protection devices. New York: American National Standards Institute.
7.
ANSI S3.5–1997 (R2002). Methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility index. New York: American National Standards Institute.
8.
ANSI S12.6–1997 (R2002). Methods for measuring the real-ear attenuation of hearing protectors. New York: American National Standards Institute.
9.
BabeuL. A. (2005). Level dependent hearing protection and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) after small arms fire. Proceedings of the 30th Annual National Hearing Conservation Association Conference [CD]. Denver, CO: National Hearing Conservation Association.
10.
BabeuL. A.BinseelM. S.MermagenT. J.LetowskiT. R. (2004). Sound localization with the Combat ArmTM earplug. Proceedings of the 29th Annual National Hearing Conservation Association Conference. Denver, CO: National Hearing Conservation Association.
11.
BergerE. H. (2003a). Noise control and hearing conservation: Why do it? In BergerE. H.RoysterL. H.RoysterJ. D.DriscollD. P.LayneM. (Eds.), The noise manual (rev. 5th ed., pp. 2–17). Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
12.
BergerE. H. (2003b). Hearing protection devices. In BergerE. H.RoysterL. H.RoysterJ. D.DriscollD. P.LayneM. (Eds.), The noise manual (rev. 5th ed., pp. 379–454). Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
13.
BergerE. H.CasaliJ. G. (1997). Hearing protection devices. In CrockerM. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of acoustics (pp. 967–981). New York: Wiley.
14.
BergerE. H.RoysterL. H.RoysterJ. D.DriscollD. P.LayneM. (Eds.) (2003). The noise manual (rev. 5th ed.). Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
15.
BhattacharyaS. K.RoyA.TripathiS. R.ChatterjeeS. K. (1985, July). Behavioral measurements in textile weavers wearing hearing protectors. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 82, 55–64.
16.
CasaliJ. G. (1999). Litigating community noise annoyance: A human factors perspective. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting (pp. 612–616). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
17.
CasaliJ. G. (2005). Advancements in hearing protection: Technology, applications, and challenges for performance testing and product labeling. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Congress and Exhibition on Noise Control Engineering (on CD; pp. 2097–2118). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Brazilian Acoustical Society.
18.
CasaliJ. G. (2006). Sound and noise. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (3rd ed.; pp. 612–642). New York: Wiley.
19.
CasaliJ. G.BergerE. H. (1996). Technology advancements in hearing protection: Active noise reduction, frequency/amplitude-sensitivity, and uniform attenuation. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 57, 175–185.
20.
CasaliJ. G.HorylevM. J. (1987). Speech discrimination in noise: The influence of hearing protection. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting (pp. 1246–1250). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
21.
CasaliJ. G.RobinsonG. S. (1994). Narrow-band digital active noise reduction in a siren-canceling headset: Real-ear and acoustic manikin insertion loss. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 42(3), 101–115.
22.
CasaliJ. G.RobinsonG. S. (1999). Noise in industry: Auditory effects, measurement, regulations, and management. In KarwowskiW.MarrasW. (Eds.), Handbook of occupational ergonomics (pp. 1661–1692). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
23.
CasaliJ. G.RobinsonG. S.DabneyE. C.GaugerD. (2004). Effect of electronic ANR and conventional hearing protectors on vehicle backup alarm detection in noise. Human Factors, 46, 1–10.
24.
CasaliJ. G.WrightW. H. (1995). Do amplitude-sensitive hearing protectors improve detectability of vehicle backup alarms in noise? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting (pp. 994–998). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
25.
CohenA. (1976). The influence of a company hearing protection program on extra-auditory problems in workers. Journal of Safety Research, 8(4), 146–162.
26.
CrockerM. (Ed.) (1998). Handbook of acoustics. New York: Wiley.
27.
DeatherageB. H. (1972). Auditory and other sensory forms of information presentation. In Van CottH. P.KincadeR. G. (Eds.), Human engineering guide to equipment design (pp. 123–160). New York: Wiley.
28.
DenenbergJ. N.ClaybaughD. J. (1993). A selective canceling headset for use in emergency vehicles. Institute of Noise Control Engineering Journal/Japan, 17 (2), 1993.
29.
DriscollD. P.StewartN. D.AndersonR. R. (2003). Community noise. In BergerE. H.RoysterL. H.RoysterJ. D.DriscollD. P.LayneM. (Eds.), The noise manual (rev. 5th ed., pp. 601–637). Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
30.
DummerW. (1997). Occupational health and workman's compensation in Chile. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 12(12), 805–812.
31.
EarshenJ. J. (2003). Sound measurement: Instrumentation and noise descriptors. In BergerE. H.RoysterL. H.RoysterJ. D.DriscollD. P.LayneM. (Eds.), The noise manual (rev. 5th ed., pp. 41–100). Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
32.
EganJ. P.HakeH. W. (1950). On the masking pattern of a simple auditory stimulus. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22, 622–630.
33.
EPA. (1979). Noise labeling requirements for hearing protectors. Environmental Protection Agency, 40CFR211, Federal Register, 44(190), 56130–56147.
34.
EPA. (2003). EPA Docket OAR-2003–0024. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Workshop on Hearing Protection Devices, Washington, D.C., March 27–28.
35.
FidellS. M.PearsonsK. S. (1997). Community response to environmental noise. In CrockerM. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of acoustics (pp. 1083–1091). New York: Wiley.
36.
FletcherH. (1940). Auditory patterns. Reviews of Modern Physics, 12, 47–65.
37.
GlasbergB. R.MooreB. C. J. (1990). Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hearing Research, 47, 103–138.
38.
GowerD.CasaliJ. G. (1994). Speech intelligibility and protective effectiveness of selected active noise reduction and conventional communications headsets. Human Factors, 36, 350–367.
39.
HarrisC. M. (1991). Handbook of acoustical measurements and noise control. New York: McGraw-Hill.
40.
HawkinsJ. E.StevensS. S. (1950). The masking of pure tones and of speech by white noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22(1), 6–13.
41.
HormannH.Lazarus-MainkaG.SchubeiusM.LazarusH. (1984). The effect of noise and the wearing of ear protectors on verbal communication. Noise Control Engineering Journal23(2), 69–77.
42.
HowellK.MartinA. M. (1975). An investigation of the effects of hearing protectors on vocal communication in noise. Journal of Sound and Vibration41(2), 181–196.
43.
ISO 7731–2003(E). Danger signals for public and work areas—Auditory danger signals. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
44.
KryterK. D. (1994). The handbook of hearing and the effects of noise. New York: Academic Press.
45.
LancasterJ. A.CasaliJ. G. (2005). An integrated MIRE field measurement technique for predicting real-ear attenuation of a custom-molded earplug: Instrumentation and validation. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual National Hearing Conservation Association Conference [CD]. Denver, CO: National Hearing Conservation Association.
46.
LaugheryK. R.WogalterM. S. (2006). Warning design and effectiveness: Current status and new directions. In WilligesR. C. (Ed.), Reviews of human factors and ergonomics, Volume 2 (pp. 241–271). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
47.
MelamidS.BruhisS. (1996). The effects of chronic industrial noise exposure on urinary corticol, fatigue, and irritability. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 38, 252–256.
48.
MelnickW. (1991). Hearing loss from noise exposure. In HarrisC. M. (Ed.), Handbook of acoustical measurements and noise control (pp. 18.1–18.19) New York: McGraw-Hill.
49.
MershonD. H.LinL. J. (1987). Directional localization in high ambient noise with and without the use of hearing protectors. Ergonomics, 30, 1161–1173.
50.
MoskoJ. D.FletcherJ. L. (1971). Evaluation of the Gunfender earplug: Temporary threshold shift and speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49: 1732–1733.
51.
MSHA. (1999). Health standards for occupational noise exposure; Final Rule. Mine Safety and Health Administration, 30CFR Part 62, 64. Federal Register, 49548–49634, 49636–49637.
52.
MurphyW. J.FranksJ. R. (2002). Do sound restoration earmuffs provide adequate protection for gunshot noise? Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112 (5, pt 2), 2294.
53.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (1975). List of personal hearing protectors and attenuation data (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-HEW Publication No. 76–120; pp. 21–37). Washington, DC: Author.
54.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (1996). National occupational research agenda (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health DHHA [NIOSH] Publication No. 96–115). Cincinnati, OH: Author.
55.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (1998). A proposed national strategy for the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss. In Proposed national strategies for the prevention of leading work-related diseases, Part 2 (pp. 51–63). Cincinnati, OH: Author.
56.
National Institutes of Health (NIH). (1990). Noise and hearing loss. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Panel. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 3185–3190.
57.
NixonC. W.McKinleyR. L.SteuverJ. W. (1992). Performance of active noise reduction headsets. In DancerA. L.HendersonD.SalviR. J.HamernikR. P. (Eds.), Noise-induced hearing loss (pp. 389–400). St. Louis: MosbyYear Book.
58.
NoweirM. H. (1984). Noise exposure as related to productivity, disciplinary actions, absenteeism, and accidents among textile workers. Journal of Safety Research, 15(4), 163–174.
59.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). (1971a). Occupational noise exposure (general industry). Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 29CFR1910.95. Federal Register, 36 (10), 10518.
60.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). (1971b). Occupational noise exposure (construction industry). Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 29CFR1926.52. Federal Register.
61.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). (1983). Occupational noise exposure; hearing conservation amendment; final rule. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 29CFR1910.95. Federal Register, 48(46), 9738–9785.
62.
ParkM. Y.CasaliJ. G. (1991). A controlled investigation of in-field attenuation performance of selected insert, earmuff, and canal cap hearing protectors. Human Factors, 33, 693–714.
63.
PoultonE. (1978). A new look at the effects of noise: A rejoinder. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1068–1079.
64.
RobinsonG. S.CasaliJ. G. (2003). Speech communications and signal detection in noise. In BergerE. H.RoysterL. H.RoysterJ. D.DriscollD. P.LayneM. (Eds.), The noise manual (rev. 5th ed., pp. 567–600). Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
65.
SandersM. S.McCormickE. J. (1993). Human factors in engineering and design (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
66.
SchmidtJ. W.RoysterL. H.PearsonR. G. (1982). Impact of an industrial hearing conservation program on occupational injuries. Sound and Vibration, 16(5), 16–20.
67.
SmoorenburgG. F.AxelssonA.BabischW.DiamondI. G.IsingH.MarthE.MiedemaH.M.E.OhrstromE.RiceC.G.AbbingE.W.R.van de WielJ.A.G.Passchier-VermeerW. (1996). Effects of noise on health. Noise News International4(3), 137–150.
68.
SorkinR. D. (1987). Design of auditory and tactile displays. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 549–576). New York: McGraw-Hill.
69.
StaplesN. (1981). Hearing conservation—Is management shortchanging those at risk? Noise and Vibration Control Worldwide, 12(6), 236–238.
70.
SuterA. H. (1989). The effects of hearing protectors on speech communication and the perception of warning signals (AMCMS Code 611102.74A0011). Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory.
71.
TaylorW.PearsonJ.MairA.BurnsW. (1964). Study of noise and hearing in jute weavers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 38, 113–120.
72.
van CharanteA. W. M.MulderP. G. H. (1990). Perceptual acuity and the risk of industrial accidents. American Journal of Epidemiology, 121, 652–663.
73.
VoixJ.ZeidanJ.CloutierA. (2005). A new approach to the objective assessment of HPD performance in the field. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual National Hearing Conservation Association Conference [CD]. Denver, CO: National Hearing Conservation Association.
74.
Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia (WCB). (1998). Occupational diseases in British Columbia, 1979–1996. Vancouver, Canada: Author.
75.
WestonH. C.AdamsS. (1935). The performance of weavers under varying conditions of noise (Report No. 70). London: Medical Research Council Industrial Health Research Board.
76.
World Health Organization (WHO). (1995). Community noise. In BerglundB.LindvallT. (Eds.), Archives of the Center for Sensory Research, 2(1). Stockholm: University of Stockholm.
77.
WilkinsP. A.MartinA. M. (1982). The effects of hearing protection on the perception of warning sounds. In AlbertiP. W. (Ed.), Personal hearing protection in industry (pp. 339–369). New York: Raven Press.
78.
WilkinsP. A.MartinA. M. (1985). The role of acoustical characteristics in the perception of warning sounds and the effects of wearing hearing protection. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 100(2), 181–190.
79.
ZwerlingC.WhittenP. S.DavisC. S.SprinceN. L. (1997). Occupational injuries among workers with disabilities, the National Health Interview Survey, 1985–1994. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 2163–2166.
