Summary no.3
I am still doing my research summaries on annoying sounds and its affect on cognition. Though there is little research done on the affects of annoying sounds to cognition; the studies that have been done show that the effects include: stress, anxiety, frustration, and poor quality in work, along with many more.
The first article did a study which tested the effects of masked and unmasked office noise on arousal, stress, and cognitive performance. The study consisted of two groups; one which worked in an environment with masked noise and the other group worked in an environment with unmasked noise. I would agree with the author’s hypothesis which was, “that the no noise group will perform best on a measure of cognitive complexity and will feel the least disturbed and stressed out by the environment. The masked noise subjects will perform better than those in the unmasked condition on both complexity and a simple attention task; they will feel more aroused but less disturbed or stressed by the environment” (Loewen & Suedfeld).
This particular study concentrates on the effects on arousal and task performance and analyzes specific distracting qualities of the noise patterns and how it might change one’s behavior. The study suggests that workers in a noisy office experience negative moods, increased stress levels, and difficulty concentrating. In my previous findings, I learned that the noisiest office spaces are the open plan designs. This study concurs with those findings and we can predict that noisy environments decrease task performance and increase our perception of arousal. The conclusion of this study confirmed that “the absence of extraneous noise was associated with the least distraction and stress with the highest integrative complexity level. The office noise condition, without masking, resulted in the highest ratings of distraction and stress, and the lowest level of integrative complexity. Masked noise led to the highest rating of arousal and to the pest performance on the simple cognitive task” (Loewen).
This study gave solutions which may help with office noise. Making modifications to the office space may help reduce the sound level. This may include; installing more walls, doors, sound barriers, carpet, and floor to ceiling walls. The next journal consisted of a study which “was designed to test the effects of open-private, closed-private, and closed-shared offices on faculty perceptions of noise and privacy, reported work behavior, faculty student interaction, and faculty flight behavior” (Becker, Gaylin, & Sayer). The faculty members were asked to fill out a survey pertaining to noise, directions, privacy, interruptions, work activities, and overall ambience. The students were asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding their kinds of experiences meeting with their teachers and asked to rate faculty offices as a place to meet (good, fair, or needs improvement). The results of this study showed that “more distractions and greater impairment of faculty work behavior and faculty-student interactions in open as compared to closed offices. Both faculty and students reported that faculty were less available in open-private offices compared to closed-private offices” (Becker, Gaylin, Sayer). It states that “employees who were transferred from conventional work areas to an open-office complained of increased noise and distractions and a loss of privacy” (Becker). This data suggest that the design and layout of offices is very important as it could affect both the students and the faculty.
In my final journal, “some researchers suggested that working memory may be affected by distraction. Salame and Baddeley (1987) reported that working memory is detrimentally affected by background speech, but is not disrupted by ambient sound” (LaPointe). Two experiments were conducted: “In experiment one; participants were required to perform a computerized cognitive measure across three conditions of distractions” (LaPointe). The three distractions were; four-talker babble, word repetition, four-talker speech with simultaneous word repetition. “Experiment two focused on the perceived loudness levels of distractions” (LaPointe). The participants were administered two cognitive tasks five different times across three different noise conditions. The noise conditions included; quiet or no distraction, comfortable loudness level with distraction level, and uncomfortable loudness level with distraction level.
In conclusion of these two studies, participants can concentrate on their work with auditory distraction at a comfortable loudness level. Though, during conditions of uncomfortable loudness level, their cognitive performance decreased and became less accurate. Interestingly enough, “the more complex the task, the greater degradation of performance in both reaction time and accuracy during conditions of distraction than did the task of simple reaction time” (LaPointe). All of the following journals that I have read have the same findings on the affects of annoying sounds to cognition. I have learned that annoying sounds are disturbing, decrease quality of work, causes stress and anxiety, increases lack of motivation, and decreases overall job satisfaction. The majority of young adults have the capability to ignore some sounds to a certain degree; while older adults are easily distracted (LaPointe).
Our group presentations have been coming along very nicely and we expect to be ready to present on our scheduled time. As far as my research summaries, I have found nine journals that pertain to my specific topic. I have learned something from each journal and now that this information will help our overall presentation.
Becker, F. D., Gield, B., Gaylin, K., Sayer, S. (1983). Office design in a community college effect on work and communication patterns. Environment and behavior, 15, 699-726.
LaPointe, L. L., Heald, G. R., Stierwalt, J. A., Kemker, B. E., Maurice, T. (2007). Effects of auditory distraction on cognitive processing of young adults: Journal of attention disorders, 10, 398-409.
Loewen, L. J., Suedfeld, P. (1992). Cognitive and arousal effects of masking office noise. Environment and behavior, 24, 381-395.
Salame, P., &Baddeley, A. (1987). Noise, unattended speech and short-term memory. Ergonomics, 30, 1185-1194.
