↓ Skip to main content

Dimensions Underlying the Perceived Similarity of Acoustic Environments

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dimensions Underlying the Perceived Similarity of Acoustic Environments
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01162
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesco Aletta, Östen Axelsson, Jian Kang

Abstract

Scientific research on how people perceive or experience and/or understand the acoustic environment as a whole (i.e., soundscape) is still in development. In order to predict how people would perceive an acoustic environment, it is central to identify its underlying acoustic properties. This was the purpose of the present study. Three successive experiments were conducted. With the aid of 30 university students, the first experiment mapped the underlying dimensions of perceived similarity among 50 acoustic environments, using a visual sorting task of their spectrograms. Three dimensions were identified: (1) Distinguishable-Indistinguishable sound sources, (2) Background-Foreground sounds, and (3) Intrusive-Smooth sound sources. The second experiment was aimed to validate the results from Experiment 1 by a listening experiment. However, a majority of the 10 expert listeners involved in Experiment 2 used a qualitatively different approach than the 30 university students in Experiment 1. A third experiment was conducted in which 10 more expert listeners performed the same task as per Experiment 2, with spliced audio signals. Nevertheless, Experiment 3 provided a statistically significantly worse result than Experiment 2. These results suggest that information about the meaning of the recorded sounds could be retrieved in the spectrograms, and that the meaning of the sounds may be captured with the aid of holistic features of the acoustic environment, but such features are still unexplored and further in-depth research is needed in this field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 27%
Student > Master 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 20 30%
Environmental Science 6 9%
Design 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 20 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,945,861
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,240
of 30,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,058
of 312,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#394
of 583 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 583 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.