Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review
The application of the soundscape approach is becoming increasingly prevalent in the evaluation of indoor acoustic environments, including office environments. However, the formalisation and standardisation of soundscape assessment methods for offices remain in the early stages, highlighting the nee...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2024-10-01
|
| Series: | Buildings |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/14/11/3408 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850217202692653056 |
|---|---|
| author | Zulfi Rachman Francesco Aletta Jian Kang |
| author_facet | Zulfi Rachman Francesco Aletta Jian Kang |
| author_sort | Zulfi Rachman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The application of the soundscape approach is becoming increasingly prevalent in the evaluation of indoor acoustic environments, including office environments. However, the formalisation and standardisation of soundscape assessment methods for offices remain in the early stages, highlighting the need for further development. This systematic review explores the methods and factors involved in soundscape assessments within office environments, which are intended to contribute to creating or improving comprehensive and widely accepted protocols. This review includes 41 studies, revealing that questionnaires (n = 36) are the most commonly used subjective tools, occasionally supplemented by interviews (n = 1). Some studies employ a combination of questionnaire and interview (n = 2), questionnaire and discussion (n = 1), or all three methods—questionnaire, interview, and discussion (n = 1). Meanwhile, direct acoustic measurements (n = 28) and cognitive tasks (n = 14) are often employed for objective evaluations. Additionally, the review categorises factors involved in objective and subjective soundscape assessments into acoustic and non-acoustic elements. It also identifies tools frequently used to assess the correlation between soundscapes and physical and psychological well-being. Collectively, this review underscores the critical factors for comprehensive soundscape assessments in office environments. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-31baeb7e68964ef0a95e8a163a313ac9 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2075-5309 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-10-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Buildings |
| spelling | doaj-art-31baeb7e68964ef0a95e8a163a313ac92025-08-20T02:08:08ZengMDPI AGBuildings2075-53092024-10-011411340810.3390/buildings14113408Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic ReviewZulfi Rachman0Francesco Aletta1Jian Kang2UCL Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett, University College London (UCL), Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London WC1H 0NN, UKUCL Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett, University College London (UCL), Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London WC1H 0NN, UKUCL Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett, University College London (UCL), Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London WC1H 0NN, UKThe application of the soundscape approach is becoming increasingly prevalent in the evaluation of indoor acoustic environments, including office environments. However, the formalisation and standardisation of soundscape assessment methods for offices remain in the early stages, highlighting the need for further development. This systematic review explores the methods and factors involved in soundscape assessments within office environments, which are intended to contribute to creating or improving comprehensive and widely accepted protocols. This review includes 41 studies, revealing that questionnaires (n = 36) are the most commonly used subjective tools, occasionally supplemented by interviews (n = 1). Some studies employ a combination of questionnaire and interview (n = 2), questionnaire and discussion (n = 1), or all three methods—questionnaire, interview, and discussion (n = 1). Meanwhile, direct acoustic measurements (n = 28) and cognitive tasks (n = 14) are often employed for objective evaluations. Additionally, the review categorises factors involved in objective and subjective soundscape assessments into acoustic and non-acoustic elements. It also identifies tools frequently used to assess the correlation between soundscapes and physical and psychological well-being. Collectively, this review underscores the critical factors for comprehensive soundscape assessments in office environments.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/14/11/3408indoor soundscapeofficeoffice environmentsoundscape assessment |
| spellingShingle | Zulfi Rachman Francesco Aletta Jian Kang Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review Buildings indoor soundscape office office environment soundscape assessment |
| title | Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review |
| title_full | Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review |
| title_fullStr | Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review |
| title_short | Exploring Soundscape Assessment Methods in Office Environments: A Systematic Review |
| title_sort | exploring soundscape assessment methods in office environments a systematic review |
| topic | indoor soundscape office office environment soundscape assessment |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/14/11/3408 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT zulfirachman exploringsoundscapeassessmentmethodsinofficeenvironmentsasystematicreview AT francescoaletta exploringsoundscapeassessmentmethodsinofficeenvironmentsasystematicreview AT jiankang exploringsoundscapeassessmentmethodsinofficeenvironmentsasystematicreview |