Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (May 2017)

The responses of subjective feeling, task performance ability, cortisol and HRV for the various types of floor impact sound: a pilot study

  • Seok Hyeon Yun,
  • Sang Jin Park,
  • Chang Sun Sim,
  • Joo Hyun Sung,
  • Ahra Kim,
  • Jang Myeong Lee,
  • Sang Hyun Lee,
  • Jiho Lee

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40557-017-0168-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 29, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Recently, noise coming from the neighborhood via floor wall has become a great social problem. The noise between the floors can be a cause of physical and psychological problems, and the different types of floor impact sound (FIS) may have the different effects on the human’s body and mind. The purpose of this study is to assess the responses of subjective feeling, task performance ability, cortisol and HRV for the various types of floor impact. Methods Ten men and 5 women were enrolled in our study, and the English listening test was performed under the twelve different types of FIS, which were made by the combinations of bang machine (B), tapping machine (T), impact ball (I) and sound-proof mattress (M). The 15 subjects were exposed to each FIS for about 3 min, and the subjective annoyance, performance ability (English listening test), cortisol level of urine/saliva and heart rate variability (HRV) were examined. The sound pressure level (SPL) and frequency of FIS were analyzed. Repeated-measures ANOVA, paired t-test, Wilcoxon signed rank test were performed for data analysis. Results The SPL of tapping machine (T) was reduced with the soundproof mattress (M) by 3.9–7.3 dBA. Impact ball (I) was higher than other FIS in low frequency (31.5–125 Hz) by 10 dBA, and tapping machine (T) was higher than other FIS in high frequency (2–4 k Hz) by 10 dBA. The subjective annoyance is highest in the combination of bang machine and tapping machine (BT), and next in the tapping machine (T). The English listening score was also lowest in the BT, and next in T. The difference of salivary cortisol levels between various types of FIS was significant (p = 0.003). The change of HRV parameters by the change of FIS types was significant in some parameters, which were total power (TP) (p = 0.004), low frequency (LF) (p = 0.002) and high frequency (HF) (p = 0.011). Conclusions These results suggest that the human’s subjective and objective responses were different according to FIS types and those combinations.

Keywords