EFFECTS OF NOISE - IELTSOLOGY

In general, it is plausible to suppose that we should prefer peace and quiet to noise. And yet most of us have had the experience of having to adjust to sleeping in the mountains or the countryside because it was initially too quiet. Van experience that suggests that humans are capable of adapting to a wide range of noise levels. Research supports this view. For example, Glass and Singer (1972) exposed people to short bursts of very loud noise and then measured their ability to work out problems and their physiological reactions to the noise. The noise was quite disruptive at first, but after about four minutes the subjects were doing just as well on their tasks as control subjects who were not exposed to noise. Their physiological arousal also declined quickly to the same levels as those of the control subjects.

Nhìn chung, khá hợp lý khi cho rằng chúng ta thích hòa bình và yên tĩnh hơn là ồn ào. Và hầu hết chúng ta đều có kinh nghiệm để làm quen với việc ngủ trên những vùng núi hoặc nông thôn bởi vì nó ban đầu thật sự “quá yên tĩnh”, một trải nghiệm cho thấy con người có khả năng thích nghi với nhiều mức độ tiếng ồn khác nhau. Nghiên cứu ủng hộ quan điểm này. Chẳng hạn, Glass and Singer (1972) đã để con người tiếp xúc với…ững vụ nổ ngắn có tiếng ồn lớn và sau đó đo khả năng của họ trong giải quyết những vấn đề và các phản ứng sinh lý của họ đối với tiếng ồn. Lúc đầu tiếng ồn khá là rắc rối, nhưng sau khoảng 4 phút, các đối tượng đã làm tốt nhiệm vụ của mình tốt cũng giống như những đối tượng kiểm soát mà không tiếp xúc với…ếng ồn. Sự kích thích sinh lý của họ cũng nhanh chóng giảm xuống mức tương đương với các đối tượng điều khiển.

But there are limits to adaptation and loud noise becomes more troublesome if the person is required to concentrate on more than one task. For example, high noise levels interfered with the performance of subjects who were required to monitor three dials at a time, a task not unlike that of an aeroplane pilot or an air-traffic controller (Broadbent, 1957). Similarly, noise did not affect a subject’s ability to track a moving line with a steering wheel, but it did interfere with the subject’s ability to repeat numbers while tracking (Finke man and Glass 1970).

Nhưng cũng có những giới hạn của sự thích ứng và tiếng ồn lớn sẽ trở nên phiền phức hơn nếu người đó được yêu cầu phải tập trung vào nhiều hơn một nhiệm vụ. Ví dụ, mức tiếng ồn cao gây trở ngại cho việc thực hiện của các đối tượng mà được yêu cầu theo dõi ba vòng quay một lần, một công việc không giống với phi công máy bay hay nhân viên điều khiển không lưu (Broadbent, 1957). Tương tự, tiếng ồn không ảnh hưởng đến khả năng của đối tượng khi theo dõi đường truyền của một tay lái nhưng nó đã can thiệp vào khả năng của đối tượng trong việc lặp lại các con số khi theo dõi (Finkelman and Glass, 1970).

Probably the most significant finding from research on noise is that its predictability is more important than how loud it is. We are much more able to ‘tune out’ chronic, background noise, even if it is quite loud than to work under circumstances with unexpected intrusions of noise. In the Glass and Singer study, in which subjects were exposed to bursts of noise as they worked on a task, some subjects heard loud bursts and others heard soft bursts. For some subjects, the bursts were spaced exactly one minute apart (predictable noise); others heard the same amount of noise overall, but the bursts occurred at random intervals (unpredictable noise).

Có lẽ phát hiện quan trọng nhất từ nghiên cứu về tiếng ồn là khả năng dự báo của nó còn quan trọng hơn mức độ tiếng ồn mà nó gây ra. Chúng ta có thể ‘điều chỉnh’ tiếng ồn dai dẳng xung quanh, ngay cả khi nó khá lớn, hơn cả khi làm việc trong những điều kiện có sự xâm nhập không mong muốn của tiếng ồn. Trong nghiên cứu của Glass và Singer, trong đó các đối tượng đã bị tiếp xúc với…ếng ồn khi họ làm nhiệm vụ, một số đối tượng đã nghe được những tiếng nổ lớn và những người khác nghe những tiếng nổ nhỏ. Đối với một số đối tượng, những tiếng nổ cách nhau chính xác một phút (tiếng ồn có thể dự đoán); Những người khác nghe thấy cùng một lượng tiếng ồn nói chung, nhưng các vụ nổ xảy ra ở các khoảng thời gian ngẫu nhiên (tiếng ồn không thể dự đoán). Các đối tượng báo cáo việc tìm ra tiếng ồn có thể dự báo và không thể dự báo đều gây ra phiền phức như nhau, và tất cả các đối tượng đều thực hiện cùng một mức độ trong phần tiếng ồn của thí nghiệm. Tuy nhiên những điều kiện tiếng ồn khác nhau lại cho những hậu quả khá khác nhau khi các đối tượng được yêu cầu kiểm tra lại tài liệu bằng văn bản trong điều kiện không có tiếng ồn. Như được trình bày trong Bảng 1, tiếng ồn không thể đoán trước đã gây ra nhiều sai sót hơn trong công tác kiểm tra so với tiếng ồn có thể báo trước, và tiếng ồn nhẹ, không thể đoán trước thực sự gây ra nhiều sai sót hơn trong công việc so với tiếng ồn lớn, và có thể đoán trước.

	Unpredictable Noise %	Predictable Noise	Average
Loud noise	40.1	31.8	35.9
Soft noise	-36.7	27.4	32.1
Average	35.4	29.6

Table 1: Proofreading Errors and Noise

Subjects reported finding the predictable and unpredictable noise equally annoying, and all subjects performed at about the same level during the noise portion of the experiment- But the different noise conditions had quite different after-effects when the subjects were required to proofread written material under conditions of no noise. As shown in Table 1 the unpredictable noise produced more errors in the later proofreading task than predictable noise; and soft, unpredictable noise actually produced slightly more errors on this task than the loud, predictable noise.

Các đối tượng báo cáo việc tìm ra tiếng ồn có thể dự báo và không thể dự báo đều gây ra phiền phức như nhau, và tất cả các đối tượng đều thực hiện cùng một mức độ trong phần tiếng ồn của thí nghiệm. Tuy nhiên những điều kiện tiếng ồn khác nhau lại cho những hậu quả khá khác nhau khi các đối tượng được yêu cầu kiểm tra lại tài liệu bằng văn bản trong điều kiện không có tiếng ồn. Như được trình bày trong Bảng 1, tiếng ồn không thể đoán trước đã gây ra nhiều sai sót hơn trong công tác kiểm tra so với tiếng ồn có thể báo trước, và tiếng ồn nhẹ, không thể đoán trước thực sự gây ra nhiều sai sót hơn trong công việc so với tiếng ồn lớn, và có thể đoán trước.

Apparently, unpredictable noise produces more fatigue than predictable noise, but it takes a while for this fatigue to take its toll on performance

Rõ ràng, tiếng ồn không thể đoán trước gây ra nhiều mệt mỏi hơn là tiếng ồn có thể dự đoán, nhưng phải mất một khoảng thời gian để sự mệt mỏi này mang lại hiệu quả.

Predictability is not the only variable that reduces or eliminates the negative effects of noise. Another is “control”. If the individual knows that he or she can control the noise, this seems to eliminate both its negative effects at the time and its after-effects. This is true even if the individual never actually exercises his or her option to turn the noise off (Glass and- Singer, 1972). Just the knowledge that one has control is sufficient.

Khả năng dự đoán không phải là biến số duy nhất làm giảm hoặc loại bỏ những ảnh hưởng tiêu cực của tiếng ồn. Một thứ khác là kiểm soát. Nếu cá nhân biết rằng họ có thể kiểm soát tiếng ồn, điều này có vẻ như loại bỏ những tác động tiêu cực của nó tại thời điểm và cả những hậu quả của nó. Điều này đúng ngay cả khi cá nhân không bao giờ thực sự thực hiện lựa chọn của mình để làm tiếng ồn biến mất (Glass và Singer, 1972). Chỉ cần những kiến thức mà một trong số chúng đã và đang kiểm soát là đủ.

The studies discussed so far exposed people lo noise for only short periods and only transient effects were studied. But the major worry about noisy environments is that living day after day with chronic noise may produce serious, lasting effects. One study, suggesting that this worry is a realistic one, compared elementary school pupils who attended schools – near Los Angeles’s busiest airport with students who attended schools in quiet neighborhoods (Cohen et al., 1980). It was found that children from the noisy schools -had higher blood pressure and were more easily distracted than those who attended the quiet schools. Moreover, there was no evidence of adaptability to the noise. In fact, the longer the children had attended the noisy schools, the more distractible they became. The effects also seem to be long-lasting. A follow-up study showed that children who were moved to less noisy classrooms still showed greater distractibility one year later than students who had always been in the quiet schools (Cohen et al, 1981). It should be noted that the two groups of children had been carefully matched by the investigators so that they were comparable in age, ethnicity, race, and social class.

Các nghiên cứu thảo luận cho đến nay con người tiếp xúc với…ếng ồn chỉ trong thời gian ngắn và chỉ có hiệu ứng tạm thời được nghiên cứu. Tuy nhiên, nỗi lo chính về môi trường tiếng ồn là sống ngày này qua ngày khác với tiếng ồn kinh niên có thể gây ra những hiệu ứng nghiêm trọng và kéo dài. Một nghiên chỉ ra rằng sự lo lắng này là có thật, khi so sánh các học sinh tiểu học tại các trường gần sân bay tấp nập nhất ở Los Angeles với những sinh viên đã theo học tại những khu phố yên tĩnh (Cohen và cộng sự, 1980). Người ta đã phát hiện ra rằng trẻ em từ những ngôi trường ồn ào có huyết áp cao hơn và dễ bị phân tâm hơn so với những người ở các trường yên tĩnh. Hơn nữa, không có một bằng chứng nào về khả năng thích ứng với tiếng ồn. Trên thực tế, càng có nhiều trẻ em học ở những trường ồn ào, chúng càng trở nên bị phân tâm hơn. Những ảnh hưởng này cũng có vẻ kéo dài. Một nghiên cứu tiếp theo cho thấy rằng những đứa trẻ được chuyển sang những lớp học ít ồn ào hơn vẫn có sự phân tâm lớn hơn một năm sau hơn là những học sinh luôn ở trong những trường học yên tĩnh (Cohen và cộng sự, 1981). Cần lưu ý rằng hai nhóm trẻ em đã được cẩn thận sắp thành cặp bởi các nhà nghiên cứu để từ đó chúng được so sánh về độ tuổi, dân tộc, chủng tộc và tầng lớp xã hội.

Related News

You may have missed