Validity of self-reported traffic intensity as a proxy for road traffic counts and noise

• Autores: Angel M. Dzhambov
• Localización: Noise Control Engineering Journal, ISSN 0736-2501, Vol. 63, Nº. 1, 2015, págs. 11-19
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • Objective road traffic data is sometimes unattainable. In these scenarios subjective rankings of road traffic are used as a proxy for both air pollutants and traffic noise. Although the validity of this construct has been tested with respect to air pollutants, it has not been challenged when it comes to traffic counts and noise. This study aimed at assessing the validity of self-reported traffic intensity (SRTI) as a proxy for road traffic counts and noise. A cross-sectional interview survey was carried out among 145 residents of 49 street segments in Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Participants were asked about individual and psychoacoustical factors which were subsequently linked to road traffic data extracted from official sources — number of light (LMV/h) and heavy (HMV/h) motor vehicles per hour, and A-weighted equivalent sound levels (LAeq). ANOVAs were conducted to test the statistical significance of the mean difference of LMV/h, HMV/h and LAeq across levels of SRTI. Results suggested that LAeq was moderately correlated with SRTI (rs = 0.39, p < 0.001) and the mean differences were not statistically significant across all observed categories of SRTI. With respect to LMV/h (rs = 0.65, p < 0.001) and HMV/h (rs = 0.59, p < 0.001) all pairwise comparisons were statistically significant except for those between the lower two categories. Linear regressions revealed that SRTI was a better predictor (R2 = 0.31, p < 0.001) of noise annoyance than LMV/h + HMV/h (R2 = 0.13, p < 0.001) or LAeq (R2 = 0.09, p < 0.001). SRTI might be an acceptable proxy for road traffic counts and to a lesser extent for traffic noise. However, special care is needed in phrasing the SRTI question and studying a homogenous area is mandatory.