Auditory

SOUND: THE AUDITORY STIMULUS

The stimulus for hearing is sound, a vibration

(
(actually
ll compression
i and
d rarefaction)
f i ) off the
h airi
molecules.

The acoustic stimulus can therefore be

represented as a sine wave, with amplitude and
frequency.

The frequency in sound is played out over time

rather than space.
space

1
 Different schematic representations of speech signal: (a)
time domain; (b) three frequency components of (a); (c) the
power spectrum of (b); (d) a continuous power spectrum of
speech.

Figure part b shows three frequencies, each of different

values and amplitudes.

These are typically plotted on a spectrum, as shown in

Figure.

The position of each bar along the spectrum represents the

actual frequency, expressed in cycles/ second or Hertz (Hz).

The height of the bar reflects the amplitude of the wave and
is typically plotted as the square of the amplitude, or the
power.

Any given sound stimulus can be presented as a single

frequency,
q y, a small set of frequencies,
q , as shown in Figure
g
part c, or a continuous band of frequencies, as shown in
Figure part d.

The frequency of the stimulus more or less corresponds to

its pitch, and the amplitude corresponds to its loudness.

2
 When describing the effects on hearing, the
amplitude is typically expressed as a ratio of
sound pressure, P, measured in decibels (dB).
That is,

As a ratio, the decibel scale can be used in either of

two ways: First, as a measure of absolute intensity,
the measure P2 is fixed at a value near the threshold
of hearing (i.e., the faintest sound that can be heard
under optimal conditions).

This is a pure tone of 1,000 Hz at 20 micro

Newtons/square meter.

In this context, decibels represent the ratio of a given

sound to the threshold of hearing.

Second, because it is a ratio measure, the decibel

scale can also be employed to characterize the ratio of
two hearable sounds;

for example, the OSHA inspector at the plant may

wish to determine how much louder the alarm is than
the ambient background noise.

Thus, we might say it is 15 dB more intense. As

another example, we might characterize a set of
earplugs as reducing the noise level by 20 dB.

Sound intensity may be measured by the sound intensity meter.

meter

This meter has a series of scales that can be selected, which

enable sound to be measured more specifically within particular
frequency ranges.

3
In addition to amplitude (intensity) and frequency (pitch),
two other critical dimensions of the sound stimulus are its
temporal characteristics

Sometimes referred to as the envelope in which a sound

occurs, and its location

The temporal characteristics are what may distinguish the

wailing of the siren from the steady blast of the car horn,
and the location (relative to the hearer) is

off course, what

h t might
i ht distinguish
di ti i h the
th siren
i off the
th firetruck
fi t k
pulling up from behind from that of the firetruck about to
cross the intersection in front

4
 THE EAR: THE SENSORY TRANSDUCER

The ear has three primary components responsible for differences

in our hearing experience.

The pinnea both collects sound and, because of its asymmetrical

shape,
h provides
id some information
i f ti regarding
di where
h th sound
the d is
i
coming from (i.e., behind or in front).

Mechanisms of the outer and middle ear (the ear drum or tympanic
membrane, and the hammer, anvil, and stirrup bones) conduct and
amplify the sound waves into the inner ear and are potential
sources of breakdown or deafness (e.g., from a rupture of the
eardrum or buildup of wax).

The muscles of the middle ear are responsive to loud noises and
reflexively contract to attenuate the amplitude of vibration before it is
conveyed to the inner ear.

This aural reflex thus offers some protection to the inner ear.

The inner ear, consisting of the cochlea, within which lies

the basilar membrane, is that portion where the physical
movement of sound energy is transduced to electrical
nerve energy that is then passed up the auditory nerve to
th brain.
the b i

This transduction is accomplished by displacement of tiny

hair cells along the basilar membrane as the membrane
moves differently to sounds of different frequency.
frequency.

Intense sound experience can lead to selective hearing

loss at particular frequencies as a result of damage to the
hair cells at particular locations along the basilar
membrane

5
6
THE AUDITORY EXPERIENCE

The four dimensions of the raw stimulus all map onto

psychological experience of sound: Loudness maps to
intensity,
y, p
pitch maps
p to frequency,
q y, and p
perceived location
maps to location.

The quality of the sound is determined both by the set of

frequencies in the stimulus and by the envelope.

In particular, the timbre of a sound stimulus what makes the

trumpet sound different from the flute-is determined by the set
of higher harmonic frequencies that lie above the fundamental
f
frequency ( hi h determines
(which d i the
h pitch
i h off the
h note).
)

Various temporal characteristics, including the envelope and

the rhythm of successive sounds, also determine the sound
quality

7
 Loudness and Pitch

Loudness is a psychological experience that correlates

with, but is not identical to, the physical measurement of
sound intensity.

Two important reasons why loudness and intensity do not

directly correspond are reflected in the psychophysical
scale of loudness and the modifying effect of pitch.

Psychophysical Scaling.

Equal increases in sound intensity (on

the decibel scale) do not create equal
increases in loudness;

for example, an 80-dB sound does not

sound twice as loud as a 40-dB sound,
and the increase from 40 to 50 dB is not
judged as the same loudness increase
as that from 70 to 80 dB.

Instead, the scale that relates physical

Instead
intensity to the psychological experience
of loudness, expressed in units called
sone.

8
One sone is established arbitrarily as the loudness of a 40-
dB tone of 1,000 Hz.

A tone twice as loud will be two sones. As an

approximation, we can say that loudness doubles with each
10 dB increase in sound intensity.
10-dB intensity

It is important to distinguish two critical levels along the

loudness scale shown in the figure on the previous slide.

As noted, the threshold is the minimum intensity at which a

sound can be detected. At some higher intensity, around 85
to 90 dB, is the second critical level at which potential
danger to the ear occurs.

Both of these levels, however, as well as the loudness of

the intensity levels in between, are influenced by the
frequency (pitch) of the sound, and so we must now
consider that influence.

Frequency Influence.

The next figure plots a series of equal-loudness curves shown

by the various wavy lines.

That is,
Th i every point
i along
l a line
li sounds
d just
j as loud
l d as any
other point along the same line.

For example, a 100-Hz tone of around 70 dB has the same

perceived loudness as a 500-Hz tone of around 57 dB. The
equal loudness contours follow more or less parallel tracks.

As shown in the figure, the frequency of a sound stimulus,

plotted on the x axis,
axis influences all of the critical levels of the
sound experience: threshold, loudness, and danger levels.
The range of human hearing is limited between around 20 Hz
and 20,000 Hz. Within this range, we are most sensitive
(lowest threshold) to sounds of around 4,000 Hz.

9
Masking.

As our worker at the beginning of the chapter discovered,

sounds can be masked by other sounds.

The nature of masking is actually quite complex (Yost, 1992),

b a few
but f off the
h most important
i principles
i i l forf design
d i are the
h
following:

1. The minimum intensity difference necessary to ensure that a

sound can be heard is around 15 dB (above the mask), although
this value may be larger if the pitch of the sound to be heard is
unknown.

2. Sounds tend to be masked most by sounds in a critical frequency

band surrounding the sound that is masked.

3. Low-pitch sounds mask high-pitch sounds more than the

converse. Thus, a woman's voice is more likely to be masked by
other male voices than a man's voice would be masked by other
female voices even if both voices are speaking at the same intensity
level.

10
ALARMS

The design of effective alarms depends very much on a good

understanding of human auditory processing (Stanton, 1994;
Bliss & Gilson, 1998; Pritchett, 2001; Woods, 1995).

Alarms tend to be a uniquely auditory design for one good

reason:

The auditory system is omnidirectional; that is, unlike visual

signals, we can sense auditory signals no matter how we are
oriented.

Furthermore, it is much more difficult to "close our ears" than it

is to close our eyes (Banbury et al., 2001). For these and other
reasons, auditory alarms induce a greater level of compliance
than do visual alarms (Wolgalter et al., 1993).

Task analysis thus dictates that if there is an alarm signal that

must be sensed, like a fire alarm, it should be given an auditory
form.

Consider the following quotation from a British pilot, taken

from an incident report, which illustrates many of the problems
with auditory alarms.

I was flying in a jetstream at night when my peaceful revelry

was shattered by the stall audio warning, the stick shaker, and
several warning lights. The effect was exactly what was not
intended; I was frightened numb for several seconds and
drawn off instruments trying to work out how to cancel the
audio/visual assault, rather than taking what should be
instinctive actions. The combined assault is so loud and bright
that it is impossible to talk to the other crew member and
action is invariably taken to cancel the cacophony before
getting on with the actual problem. (Patterson, 1990)

11
 Criteria for Alarms.

Patterson (1990) has discussed several properties of a good

alarm system, as shown in the following figure, that can
prevent the two opposing problems of detection, experienced
by our factory worker at the beginning of the chapter, and
"
"overkill"
kill" experienced
i d by
b the
h pilot
il

1. Most critically, the alarm must be heard above the

background ambient noise. This means that the noise
spectrum must be carefully measured at the hearing location
of all users who must respond to the alarm. Then, the alarm
should be tailored to be at least 15 dB above the threshold
of hearing above the noise level. This typically requires
about
b a 30-
30 dB difference
diff above
b the
h noise
i level
l l in
i order
d to
guarantee detection. It is also wise to include components of
the alarm at several different frequencies, well distributed
across the spectrum, in case the particular malfunction that
triggered the alarm creates its own noise (e.g., the whine of
a malfunctioning engine), which exceeds the ambient level

The range of appropriate levels for warning sound components on the flight
deck of the Boeing 737 (vertical line shading). The minimum of the appropriate-
level range is approximately 15 dB above auditory threshold (broken line),
which is calculated from the spectrum of the flight deck noise (solid line). The
vertical dashed lines show the components of the intermittent warning horn,
some of which are well above the maximum of the appropriate-level range.

12
 2. The alarm should not be above the danger
level for hearing, whenever this condition can be
avoided. (Obviously, if the ambient noise level is
close to the danger level, one has no choice but
to make the alarm louder by criterion 1, which is
most important.)

This danger level is around 85 to 90 dB. Careful

selection of frequencies of the alarm can often be
used to meet both of the above criteria.

For example, if ambient noise is very intense (90

dB), but only in the high frequency range, it would
be counterproductive to try to impose a 120-dB
120 dB
alarm in that same frequency range when several
less intense components in a lower frequency
range could adequately be heard.

3. Ideally, the alarm should not be overly startling or

abrupt. This can be addressed by tuning the rise time
of the alarm pulse.

4. In contrast to the experience of the British pilot, the

alarm should not disrupt the perceptual understanding
of other signals (e.g., other simultaneous alarms) or
any background speech communications that may be
essential to deal with the alarm.

This criterion in particular implies that a careful task

analysis should be performed of the conditions under
which the alarm might sound and of the necessary
communications tasks to be undertaken as a
consequence of that alarm.

13
5. The alarm should be informative, signaling to the listener the
nature of the emergency and, ideally, some indication of the
appropriate action to take. The criticality of this informativeness
criterion can be seen in one alarm system that was found in an
intensive care unit of a hospital. The unit contained six patients,
each monitored by a device with 10 different possible alarms:
60 potential signals that the staff may have had to rapidly
identify.

Some aircraft have been known to contain at least 16 different

auditory alerts, each of which, when heard, is supposed to
automatically trigger in the pilot's mind the precise identification
of the alarming condition. Such alarms are often found to be
wanting in this regard. Hence, in addition to being informative,
the alarm must not be confusable with other alarms that may be
heard in the same context.

This means that the alarm should not impose on the human's
restrictive limits of absolute judgment. Just four different alarms
may be the maximum allowable to meet this criterion if these
alarms differ from each other on only a single physical
dimension, such as pitch.

Designing Alarms.

How should an alarm system be designed to avoid,

or att least
l t minimize,
i i i th
the potential
t ti l costs
t described
d ib d above?
b ?

First, as we have noted, environmental and task

analysis must be undertaken to understand the quality
and intensity of the other sounds (noise or
communications) that might characterize the
environment in which the alarm is presented to
guarantee detectability and minimize disruption of other
essential tasks.

14
Second, to guarantee informativeness and to minimize
confusability, designers should try to stay within the limits of
absolute judgments.

However, within these limits,

However limits one can strive to make the
parameters of the different alarm sounds as different from each
other as possible by capitalizing on the various dimensions along
which sounds differ.

For example, a set of possible alarms may contain three different

dimensions: their pitch (fundamental pitch or frequency band), their
envelope (e.g., rising, woop woop; constant beep beep), and their
y
rhythm ((e.g.,
g , synchronous
y da da da versus asynchronous
y da da da
da).

A fourth dimension that could be considered (but not

easily represented graphically in the figure) is the timbre
of the sound that may contrast, for example, a horn
versus a flute.

Two alarms will be most discriminable (and least

confusable) if they are constructed at points on opposite
ends of all three (or four) dimensions.

Correspondingly, three alarms can be placed far apart

in the multidimensional space, although the design
problem becomes more complex with more possible
alarms.
alarms

However, the philosophy of maintaining wide separation

(discriminability) along each of several dimensions can
still be preserved.

15
A third step involves designing the specifics of the individual
sound. Patterson (1990) recommends the procedure
outlined in the figure on the next slide, a procedure that has
several embedded rationales.

At the top of the figure, each individual pulse in the alarm is

configured
fi d with
i h a rise
i envelope
l that
h isi not too abrupt
b (i
(i.e., at
least 20 msec) so that it will avoid the "startle" created by
more abrupt rises.

The set of pulses in the alarm sequence, shown in the

middle of the figure, are configured with two goals in mind:
(1) The unique set of pauses between each pulse can be
used to create a unique rhythm that can be used to help
avoid confusions; and
(2) the increase then decrease in intensity gives the
perception of an approaching then receding sound, which
creates a psychological sense of urgency. Edworthy, Loxley,
and Dennis (1991), and Hellier and colleagues (2002)
provide more elaborate guidelines for creating the
psychological perception of urgency from alarms.

16
 Finally, the bottom row of previously shown figure shows the
philosophy by which repeated presentations of the alarm
sequence can be implemented.

Th first
The fi t two
t presentations
t ti may be
b att high
hi h intensity
i t it to
t
guarantee their initial detection (first sequence) and
identification (first or second sequence).

Under the assumption that the operator has probably been

alerted, the third and fourth sequences may be diminished in
intensity to avoid overkill and possible masking of other
sounds by the alarm (e.g., the voice communications that
may be initiated by the alarming condition).
condition)

However, an intelligent alarm system may infer, after a few

sequences, that no action has been taken and hence repeat
the sequence a couple of times at an even higher intensity.

Voice Alarms and Meaningful Sounds.

Alarms composed of synthetic voice provide one answer to the

problems of discriminability and confusion. Unlike "symbolic"
sounds, the hearer does not need to depend on an arbitrary
learned connection to associate sound with meaning. The loud
sounds Engine fire! Or Stall! in the cockpit mean exactly what
they seem to mean.

Voice alarms are employed in several circumstances.

But voice alarms themselves have limitations that must be

considered. First, they are likely to be more confusable with a
background of other voice communications, whether this is the
ambient speech
p background
g at the time the alarm sounds,, the
task-related communications of dealing with the emergency.

Second, unless care is taken, they may be more susceptible to

frequency-specific masking noise. Third, care must be taken if
the meaning of such alarms is to be interpreted by listeners in a
multilingual environment who are less familiar with the language
of the voice.

17
False Alarms.

An alarm is of course one form of automation in that it

typically
yp y monitors some p process for the human operator
p
and alerts the operator whenever it infers that the
process is getting out of hand and requires some form of
human intervention.

Alarms are little different from the human signal detector.

When sensing low-intensity signals from the environment

(a small increase in temperature, a wisp of smoke), the
system
t sometimes
ti makes
k mistakes,
i t k i f i that
inferring th t nothing
thi
has happened when it has (the miss) or inferring that
something has happened when it has not (the false
alarm).

Most alarm designers and users set the alarm's criterion as

low as possible to minimize the miss rate for obvious safety
reasons.

But as we learned, when the low-intensity signals on which

the alarm decision is made, are themselves noisy, the
consequence of setting a miss-free
miss free criterion is a higher than
desirable false alarm rate:

to paraphrase from the old fable, the system "cries wolf" too
often (Bliss & Gilson, 1998).

Such was the experience with the initial introduction of the

ground proximity warning system in aircraft, designed to
alert pilots that they might be flying dangerously close to the
ground.

Unfortunately, when the conditions that trigger the alarm

occur very rarely, an alarm system that guarantees
detection will, almost of necessity, produce a fair number of
false alarms, or "nuisance alarms"

18
Five logical steps may be taken to avoid the
circumstances of “alarm false alarms”.

First, it is possible that the alarm criterion itself has been

set to such an extremely sensitive value that
readjustment to allow fewer false alarms will still not
appreciably increase the miss rate.

Second, more sophisticated decision algorithms within

the system may be developed to improve the sensitivity
of the alarm system, a step that was taken to address
the problems with the ground proximity warning system.

Third, users can be trained about the inevitable tradeoff

between misses and false alarms and therefore can be
taught to accept the false alarm rates as an inevitable
consequence of automated protection in an uncertain
probabilistic world rather than as a system failure.

Fourth, designers should try to provide the user with the

"raw data" or conditions that triggered the alarm, at least
by making available the tools that can verify the alarm's
accuracy.
accuracy

Finally, a logical approach suggested by Sorkin, Kantowitz,

and Kantowitz (1988) is to consider the use of graded or
likelihood alarm systems in which more than a single level
of alert is provided.

Hence, two (or more) levels can signal to the human the
system's own confidence that the alarming conditions are
present. That evidence in the fuzzy middle ground (e.g.,
the odor from a slightly burnt piece of toast), which
previously might have signaled the full fire alarm, now
triggers a signal of noticeable but reduced intensity.

19
THE SOUND TRANSMISSION PROBLEM

A more tragic illustration of communications breakdown is

provided by the 1979 collision between two jumbo jets on the
runway at Tenerife airport in the Canary Islands, in which over
500 lives were lost .

A KLM 747, was poised at the end of the runway, engines

primed, and the pilot was in a hurry to take off while it was still
possible before the already poor visibility got worse and the
airport closed operations.

Meanwhile, the other jet, a Pan American airplane that had just
landed, was still on the same runway, trying to find its way off.
Th air
The i traffic
t ffi controller
t ll instructed
i t t d the
th pilot
il t off the
th KLM:
KLM

"Okay, stand by for takeoff and I will call."

The takeoff proceeded until the aircraft collided with the Pan Am
747, which had still not steered itself clear from the runway.

The Canary Island accident tragically illustrates the

breakdown of both top-down and bottom-up processes.

The communications signal was degraded (loss of

bottom-up quality), and the KLM pilot used his own
expectations and desires to "hear what he wanted to
hear" (inappropriate top-down processing) and to
interpret the message as authorization to take off.

We can consider in more detail the role of both of these

processes in what is arguably the most important kind
of auditory communications, the processing of human
speech.

We can describe the nature of the speech stimulus and

then discuss how it may be distorted in its transmission
by changes in signal quality and by noise. We consider
possible ways of remediating breakdowns in the speech
transmission process.

20
 Measuring Speech Communications

Human factors engineers know that noise degrades

communications, but they must often assess (or predict)
precisely how much communications will be lost in certain
degraded conditions.

For this, we must consider the measurement of speech

communications effectiveness.

There are two different approaches to measuring speech

communications, based on bottom-up and top-down
processing respectively.

The bottom-up approach derives some objective measure

of speech quality. It is most appropriate in measuring the
potential degrading effects of noise. Thus, the articulation
index (AI) computes the signal-to-noise ratio (db of speech
sound minus db of background noise) across a range of
the spectrum in which useful speech information is
imparted.

Schematic representation of the calculation of an AI. The speech

spectrum has been divided into four bands, weighted in importance by the
relative power that each contributes to the speech signal. The calculations
are shown in the rows below the figure.

21
While the objective merits of the bottom-up approach are
clear, its limits in predicting the understandability of speech
should become apparent when one considers the
contributions of top-down processing to speech perception.

For example, two letter strings, abcdefghij and wcignspexl,

might both be heard at intensities with the same AI. But it is
clear that more letters of the first string would be correctly
understood .

Why?

Because the listener's knowledge of the predictable

sequence of letters in the alphabet allows perception to "fill
in the gaps" and essentially guess the contents of a letter
whose sensory clarity may be missing. This, of course, is the
role of top-down processing.

A measure that takes top-down processing into account is

the speech intelligibility level (SIL).

This index measures the percentage items correctly heard.

Naturally, at any given bottom-up AI level, this percentage

will vary as a function of the listener's expectation of and
knowledge about the message communicated, a variable
that influences the effectiveness of top-down processing.

This complementarity relationship between bottom-up and

top-down processing is illustrated in following figure, which
shows, for example, that sentences that are known to
listeners can be recognized with just as much accuracy as
random isolated words, even though the latter are presented
with nearly twice the bottom-up sensory quality.

22
Speech Distortions

Distortions may result from a variety of causes.

For example, clipping of the beginning and ends of words,

reduced bandwidth of high-demand
high demand communications
channels, echoes and reverberations, and even the low
quality of some digitized synthetic speech signals.

While the bottom-up influences of these effects cannot be

as accurately quantified as the effects of noise, there are
nevertheless important human factors guidelines that can
be employed to minimize their negative impact on voice
recognition.

One issue that has received particular attention from

acoustic engineers is how to minimize the distortions
resulting when the high-information speech signal must be
somehow "filtered" to be conveyed over a channel of lower
bandwidth (e.g., through digitized speech).

23
 For example, a raw
speech waveform such as
that shown may contain
over 59,000 bits of
information per second.

There are a few ways to

reduce the information content
of a speech signal. One may
filter out the high frequencies,
digitize the signal to discrete
levels clip out bits of the
levels,
signal, or reduce the range of
amplitudes by clipping out the
middle range.

The issue of importance becomes the level of fidelity of

the voice synthesizer necessary to

(1) produce recognizable speech,

(2) produce recognizable speech that can be heard in

noise,
i and
d

(3) support "easy listening."

The third issue is particularly important, as Pisoni

(1982) has found that listening to synthetic speech
takes more mental resources than does listening to
natural speech.

Thus, listening to synthetic speech can produce greater

interference with other ongoing tasks that must be
accomplished concurrently with the listening task or
will be more disrupted by the mental demands of
those concurrent tasks.

24
 The human information-processing system is
designed
g to p
prolong
g the duration of the spoken
p
word for a few seconds through what is called
echoic memory.

However, beyond this time, spoken information

must be actively rehearsed, a demand that
competes for resources with other tasks.

Hence, when displayed messages are more than

a few
f words,
d they
h should
h ld beb delivered
d li d visually
i ll or
at least backed up with a redundant visual signal.

Hearing Loss

In addition to noise and distortions, a final factor responsible for

loss in voice transmission is the potential loss of hearing of the.

As shown in the following figure, simple age is responsible for a

large portion of hearing loss, particularly in the high-frequency
regions, a factor that should be considered in the design of
alarm systems, particularly in nursing homes.

On top of the age-related declines may be added certain

occupation-specific losses related to the hazards of a noisy
workplace.
workplace

These are the sorts of hazards that organizations (OSHA) try to

eliminate.

25
 Idealized median (50th
percentile) hearing loss at
different frequencies for
males and females as a
function of age.

NOISE REVISITED

We discussed noise as a factor disrupting the transmission of

information.

We consider two other important human factors concerns with noise:

its potential as a health hazard in the workplace and its potential as an
irritant in the environment. environment.

The worker in our story was concerned about the impact of noise at
her workplace on her ability to hear.

When we examine the effects of noise,

noise we consider three components
of the potential hearing loss. The first, masking, has already been
discussed; this is a loss of sensitivity to a signal while the noise is
present.

26
The second form of noise-induced hearing loss is the
temporary threshold shifi (Crocker, 1997).

If our worker steps away from the machine to a quieter

place to answer the telephone, she may still have some
difficulty hearing because of the "carryover" effect of the
previous
i noise
i exposure.

This temporary threshold shift (TTS) is large immediately

after the noise is terminated but declines over the
following minutes as hearing is "recovered" (next figure).

The TTS is typically expressed as the amount of loss in

hearing (shift in threshold in dB) that is present two
minutes after the source of noise has terminated.
terminated

The TTS is increased by a longer prior noise exposure

and a greater prior level of that exposure. The TTS can
be quite large. For example, the TTS after being exposed
to 100 dB noise for 100 minutes is 60 dB.

TTS following the termination of noise. Note that sensitivity is

recovered (the threshold shift is reduced over time). Its level
at two minutes is arbitrarily defined as the TTS.

27
 The third form of noise-induced hearing loss, which has
the most serious implications for worker health, is the
permanent threshold shifi (PTS).

This measure describes the "occupational deafness" that

may set in after workers have been exposed to months
or years of high-intensity noise at the workplace.

Like the TTS, the PTS is greater with both louder and
longer prior exposure to noise.

Also, like age-related hearing loss, the PTS tends to be

more pronounced d att higher
hi h frequencies,
f i usually
ll greatest
t t
at around 4,000 Hz

Noise Reduction in the Workplace

The Source: Equipment and Tool Selection.

Many times, effective reduction can be attained by the

appropriate and careful choice of tools or sound-producing
equipment.
i t

Crocker (1997) provides some good case studies where this

has been done.

Ventilation or fans, or handtools, for example, vary in the

sounds they produce, and appropriate choices in purchasing
such items can be made.

The noise of vibrating metal, the source of loud sounds in

many industrial settings, can be attenuated by using damping
material, such as rubber. One should consider also that the
irritation of noise is considerably greater in the high frequency
region (the shrill pierced whine) than in the mid- or low-
frequency region (the low rumble)

28
The Environment.

The environment or path from the sound source to the

human can also be altered in several ways.

Changing the environment near the source, for example, is

illustrated in following figure,
figure which shows the attenuation in
noise achieved by surrounding a piece of equipment with a
plexiglass shield.

Sound absorbing walls, ceilings, and floors can also be very

effective in reducing the noise coming from reverberations.

Finally, there are many circumstances when repositioning

workers relative to the source of noise can be effective.

The effectiveness of such relocation is considerably

enhanced when the noise emanates from only a single
source. This is more likely to be the case if the source is
present in a more sound-absorbent environment (less
reverberating).

Use of ¼ -in. (6-mm)-thick safety glass barrier to reduce high-

frequency noise from a punch press. (Source: American
Industrial Hygiene Association, 1975, Figure 11.73. Reprinted
with permission by the American Industrial Hygiene
Association.)

29
The Listener: Ear Protection.

If noise cannot be reduced to acceptable levels at the

source or path, then solutions can be applied to the listener.

Ear protection devices that must be made available when

noise levels exceed the action level are of two generic types:
earplugs, which fit inside the ear, and ear muffs, which fit
over the top of the ear.

As commercially available products, each is provided with a

certified noise reduction ratio (NRR), expressed in decibels,
and each may also have very different spectral
characteristics (i.e., different decibel reduction across the
spectrum).

For both kinds of devices, it appears that the manufacturer's

specified NRR is typically greater (more optimistic) than is
the actual noise reduction experienced by users in the
workplace

THE OTHER SENSES

g have held the stage

Vision and hearing g duringg this chapter
p
and the previous one for the important reason that the visual
and auditory senses are of greatest implications for the
design of human-machine systems.

The "other" senses, critically important in human experience,

have played considerably less of a role in system design.

Hence, we do not specifically discuss the senses of smell

and
d taste,
t t important
i t t as both
b th off these
th are to
t the
th pleasures
l off
eating (although smell can provide an important safety
function as an advanced warning of fires and overheating
engines).

30
 Three other categories of sensory experience that have
some direct relevance to design: touch and feel (the
t til and
tactile d haptic
h ti sense), ) limb
li b position
iti and d motion
ti
(proprioception and kinesthesis), and whole-body
orientation and motion (the vestibular senses).

All of these offer important channels of information that

help coordinate human interaction with many physical
systems.

Touch: Tactile and Haptic Senses

Lying just under the skin are sensory receptors that respond to
pressure on theth skin
ki and d relay
l th i information
their i f ti t the
to th brain
b i
regarding the subtle changes in force applied by the hands and
fingers (or other parts of the body) as they interact with physical
things in the environment.

Along with the sensation of pressure, these senses, tightly

coupled with the proprioceptive sense of finger position, also
provide haptic information regarding the shape of manipulated
objects and things (Loomis & Lederman,
Lederman 1986; Kaczmarer &
Bach-T-Rita, 1995).

We see the importance of these sensory channels in the

following examples:

31
1. A problem with the membrane keyboards sometimes
found on calculators is that they do not offer the same
"feel" (tactile feedback) when the fingers are
positioned on the button as do mechanical keys.

2. Gloves, to be worn in cold weather (or in hazardous

operations) must be designed with sensitivity to
maintaining some tactile feedback if manipulation is
required (Karis, 1987).

3. Early concern about the confusion that pilots

experienced between two very different controls-the
landing gear and the flaps-was addressed by
redesigning the control handles to feel quite distinct.
The landing , gear felt like a wheel-the plane's tire-
while the flap control felt like a rectangular flap.
Incidentally this design also made the controls feel
and look somewhat like the system that they activate;

4. The tactile sense is well structured as an

alternative channel to convey both spatial and
symbolic information for the blind through the
braille alphabet.

5. Designers of virtual environments (Durlach &

Mavor, 1995; Kaczmarer & Bach-T-Rita, 1995),
attempt to provide artificial sensations of touch and
feel via electrical stimulation to the fingers, as the
hand manipulates "virtual objects" (Bullinger et al.,
1997).

6. In situations of high visual load, tactile displays

can be used to call attention to important discrete
events (Sklar & Sarter, 1999) and can sometimes
provide important information for tracking, or
continuous control (Kortelling & van Emmerick,
1998)

32