IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i16p9207-d615711.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Usability of Visual Analogue Scales in Assessing Human Perception of Sound with University Students Using a Web-Based Tablet Interface

Author

Listed:
  • Wonyoung Yang

    (Division of Architecture, Gwangju University, Gwangju 61743, Korea)

  • Jin Yong Jeon

    (Department of Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul 04763, Korea)

Abstract

Response scales in auditory perception assessment are critical for capturing the true responses of listeners. Despite its impact on data, response scales have received the least attention in auditory perception assessment. In this study, the usability of visual analogue scales for auditory perception assessment was investigated. Five response scales (a unipolar visual analogue scale–negated to regular, a unipolar visual analogue scale—regular to negated, a bipolar visual analogue scale–positive to negative, a bipolar visual analogue scale—negative to positive, and a unipolar 11-point scale (ISO/TS 15666:2021)) for auditory perception assessment are presented. Music and traffic noise were presented to 60 university students at two different levels, i.e., 45 and 65 dBA, respectively. A web-based experimental design was implemented, and tablet pads were provided to the respondents to record their responses. The unipolar 11-point scale required the longest response time, followed by the two unipolar visual analogue scales and two bipolar visual analogue scales with statistical significance. All response scales used in this study achieved statistical reliability and sensitivity for the auditory perception assessment. Among the five response scales, the bipolar visual analogue scale (negative to positive) ranked first in reliability over repeated measures, exhibited sensitivity in differentiating sound sources, and was preferred by the respondents under the conditions of the present study. None of the respondents preferred the unipolar 11-point scale. The visual analogue scale was favoured over the traditional unipolar 11-point scale by young educated adults in a mobile-based testing environment. Moreover, the bipolar visual analogue scale demonstrated the highest reliability and sensitivity, and it was preferred the most by the respondents. The semantic labelling direction from negated to regular, or from negative to positive, is preferred over its opposite counterpart. Further research is necessary to investigate the use of response scales for the general public including children and the elderly, as well as that of semantic adjectives and their counterparts for auditory perception assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Wonyoung Yang & Jin Yong Jeon, 2021. "Usability of Visual Analogue Scales in Assessing Human Perception of Sound with University Students Using a Web-Based Tablet Interface," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9207-:d:615711
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9207/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9207/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wonyoung Yang & Hyeun Jun Moon & Jin Yong Jeon, 2019. "Comparison of Response Scales as Measures of Indoor Environmental Perception in Combined Thermal and Acoustic Conditions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-26, July.
    2. Paul T E Cusack, 2020. "On Pain," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(3), pages 24253-24254, October.
    3. Weijters, Bert & Geuens, Maggie & Schillewaert, Niels, 2009. "The proximity effect: The role of inter-item distance on reverse-item bias," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 2-12.
    4. Anna DeCastellarnau, 2018. "A classification of response scale characteristics that affect data quality: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1523-1559, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sana Sadiq & Khadija Anasse & Najib Slimani, 2022. "The impact of mobile phones on high school students: connecting the research dots," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 30(1), pages 252-270, April.
    2. Jitka Vseteckova, 2020. "Psychological Therapy for ICT Literate Older Adults in the Time of COVID-19 - Perceptions on the Acceptability of Online Versus Face to Face Versions of a Mindfulness for Later Life Group," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(1), pages 23912-23916, October.
    3. Khalid Ahmed Al-Ansari & Ahmet Faruk Aysan, 2021. "More than ten years of Blockchain creation: How did we use the technology and which direction is the research heading? [Plus de dix ans de création Blockchain : Comment avons-nous utilisé la techno," Working Papers hal-03343048, HAL.
    4. Ling, Gabriel Hoh Teck & Suhud, Nur Amiera binti Md & Leng, Pau Chung & Yeo, Lee Bak & Cheng, Chin Tiong & Ahmad, Mohd Hamdan Haji & Matusin, AK Mohd Rafiq AK, 2021. "Factors Influencing Asia-Pacific Countries’ Success Level in Curbing COVID-19: A Review Using a Social–Ecological System (SES) Framework," SocArXiv b9f2w, Center for Open Science.
    5. Rafał Krupiński, 2020. "Virtual Reality System and Scientific Visualisation for Smart Designing and Evaluating of Lighting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Felderer, Barbara & Repke, Lydia & Weber, Wiebke & Schweisthal, jonas & Bothmann, Ludwig, 2024. "Predicting the Validity and Reliability of Survey Questions," OSF Preprints hkngd, Center for Open Science.
    7. Óscar Chiva-Bartoll & Honorato Morente-Oria & Francisco Tomás González-Fernández & Pedro Jesús Ruiz-Montero, 2020. "Anxiety and Bodily Pain in Older Women Participants in a Physical Education Program. A Multiple Moderated Mediation Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-12, May.
    8. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    9. Tonata Dengeingei & Laura Uusiku & Olivia N Tuhadeleni & Alice Lifalaza, 2020. "Assessing Knowledge and Practice Regarding the Management of Dysmenorrhea Among Students at University of Namibia Rundu Campus," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(9), pages 105-105, August.
    10. Craig C Kage & Mohsen Akbari-Shandiz & Mary H Foltz & Rebekah L Lawrence & Taycia L Brandon & Nathaniel E Helwig & Arin M Ellingson, 2020. "Validation of an automated shape-matching algorithm for biplane radiographic spine osteokinematics and radiostereometric analysis error quantification," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, February.
    11. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Morgan, T. Clifton & Syropoulos, Constantinos & Yotov, Yoto V., 2021. "Understanding economic sanctions: Interdisciplinary perspectives on theory and evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Michael Dolph & Gabriel Tremblay & Hoyee Leong, 2021. "Cost Effectiveness of Triplet Selinexor-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone (XVd) in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (MM) Based on Results from the Phase III BOSTON Trial," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(11), pages 1309-1325, November.
    13. Zack Cooper & Joseph J. Doyle Jr. & John A. Graves & Jonathan Gruber, 2022. "Do Higher-Priced Hospitals Deliver Higher-Quality Care?," NBER Working Papers 29809, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. William Encinosa & Didem Bernard & Thomas M. Selden, 2022. "Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-52, March.
    15. Prabhath Dhammika Tharindu Arachchi Appuhamilage & Hom B. Rijal, 2025. "Effective Heat Transfer Mechanisms of Personal Comfort Systems for Thermal Comfort and Energy Savings: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-31, October.
    16. David G. Blanchflower & Alex Bryson, 2022. "Union Membership Peaks in Midlife," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 60(1), pages 124-151, March.
    17. Jiaxin Li & Zijun Zhou & Jianyu Dong & Ying Fu & Yuan Li & Ze Luan & Xin Peng, 2021. "Predicting breast cancer 5-year survival using machine learning: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-23, April.
    18. Helene Berntzen & Ida Torunn Bjørk & Ann‐Marie Storsveen & Hilde Wøien, 2020. "“Please mind the gap”: A secondary analysis of discomfort and comfort in intensive care," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(13-14), pages 2441-2454, July.
    19. Axel Hallgren & Anders Hansson, 2021. "Conflicting Narratives of Deep Sea Mining," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, May.
    20. Esmail Shariati & Ali Dadgari & Seyedeh Solmaz Talebi & Gholam Reza Mahmoodi Shan & Hossein Ebrahimi, 2021. "The Effect of the Web-Based Communication between a Nurse and a Family Member on the Perceived Stress of the Family Member of Patients with Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19: A Parallel Randomized Clini," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 30(7), pages 1098-1106, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9207-:d:615711. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.