EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 40 / No 3 (June 2022) JNWPU, 40 3 (2022) 560-567 References
Open Access
Issue
JNWPU
Volume 40, Number 3, June 2022
Page(s) 560 - 567
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/jnwpu/20224030560
Published online 19 September 2022
  1. BLAUERT JJEKOSCH U. Sound-quality evaluation-a multi-layered problem[J]. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 1997, 83(5): 747–753 [Article] [Google Scholar]
  2. JOO YOUNG HZHEN-TING OBHAN L, et al. Effects of adding natural sounds to urban noises on the perceived loudness of noise and soundscape quality[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 711(C): 134571 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. FAN Q DHE Y JHU L. Soundscape evaluation and construction strategy of park road[J]. Applied Acoustics, 2020, 174: 107685 [Article] [Google Scholar]
  4. MA K WMAK C MWONG H M. Effects of environmental sound quality on soundscape preference in a public urban space[J]. Applied Acoustics, 2021, 171: 107570 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. BOLIN KNILSSON M EKHAN S. The potential of natural sounds to mask wind turbine noise[J]. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 2010, 96(1): 131–137 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. JEON J YLEE P JYOU J, et al. A Perceptual assessment of quality of urban soundscapes with combined noise sources and water sounds[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2010, 127(3): 1357–1360[Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. LI Zhengguang. Study on acoustical simulation and adustment methods of subjective perception and objective law of electroencephalogram variation under noise exposure[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2012 (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  8. LEUNG T MCHAU C KTANG S K, et al. Developing a multivariate model for predicting the noise annoyance responses due to combined water sound and road traffic noise exposure[J]. Applied Acoustics, 2017, 127: 284–291 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. SUHARA YIKEFUJI DNAKAYAMA M, et al. A design of control signal in reducing discomfort of the dental treatment sound based on auditory masking[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2013, 133(5): 3452–3456 [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. BROCOLINI LPARIZET ECHEVRET P. Effect of masking noise on cognitive performance and annoyance in open plan offices[J]. Applied Acoustics, 2016, 114: 44–55 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. COENSEL B DVANWETSWINKEL SBOTTELDOOREN D. Effects of natural sounds on the perception of road traffic noise[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2011, 129(4): EL148–EL153 [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. GALBRUN LALI T T. Acoustical and perceptual assessment of water sounds and their use over road traffic noise[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2013, 133(1): 227–237 [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. GYGI BWATSON C SKIDD G R. Factors in the detection of environmental sounds[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1997, 101(5): 3149 [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. CHEN Kean, WANG Na, WANG Jinchang. Investigation on human ear's capability for identifing non-speech objects[J]. Acta Physica Sinica, 2009, 58(7): 5075–5082 [Article] (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  15. CHEN Kean. Auditory perception and automatic recognition of ambient sound[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2014 (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  16. DURLACH N IMASON C RKIDD G, et al. Note on informational masking(L)[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2003, 113(6): 2984–2987 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. MARIA RÖSTEB AMATS E N, et al. Effects of sounds from water on perception of acoustic environments dominated by road-sraffic noise[J]. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 2013, 99(2): 218–225 [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.