Appropriate masking sound is necessary for reaching acceptable speech privacy in open offices. However, the electronic masking systems have not become very popular although the importance of masking is emphasized in design guidelines worldwide. One reason may be that very few scientific field experiments have been published in this area. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the effects of artificial masking sound on workers in a small department of 15 workers. Measurements and questionnaires were conducted before and after launching the system. Masking sound 44 dBA was produced using centralized pink noise generator and ceiling loudspeakers. The spectrum reminded ventilation noise. Initial background noise level was 36 dBA. Acoustic measurements showed that masking sound reduced the radius of distraction rD from 15 m to 7 m, i.e. acoustic privacy improved significantly. The questionnaire revealed several positive changes attributable to masking. Distraction caused by speech and other varying office sounds was reduced. Noise‐related stress was reduced. Evaluations of acoustic environment, speech privacy and self‐rated work efficiency were improved. The results showed no adverse effects of masking on workers.
Skip Nav Destination
,
Article navigation
May 2008
Meeting abstract. No PDF available.
May 01 2008
Effect of sound masking on workers in an open office Free
Annu Haapakangas;
Annu Haapakangas
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Lemminkäisenkatu 14‐18 B, 20520 Turku, Finland, [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Valtteri O. Hongisto
Valtteri O. Hongisto
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Lemminkäisenkatu 14‐18 B, 20520 Turku, Finland, [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Annu Haapakangas
Valtteri O. Hongisto
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Lemminkäisenkatu 14‐18 B, 20520 Turku, Finland, [email protected]
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123, 2971 (2008)
Citation
Annu Haapakangas, Valtteri O. Hongisto; Effect of sound masking on workers in an open office. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1 May 2008; 123 (5_Supplement): 2971. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2932454
Download citation file:
Citing articles via
Focality of sound source placement by higher (ninth) order ambisonics and perceptual effects of spectral reproduction errors
Nima Zargarnezhad, Bruno Mesquita, et al.
A survey of sound source localization with deep learning methods
Pierre-Amaury Grumiaux, Srđan Kitić, et al.
Drawer-like tunable ventilated sound barrier
Yong Ge, Yi-jun Guan, et al.
Related Content
Distraction distance and perceived disturbance by noise—An analysis of 21 open-plan offices
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (January 2017)
Characterization of acoustics in open offices ‐ four case studies
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (May 2008)
Subjective and objective rating of spectrally different pseudorandom noises—Implications for speech masking design
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (March 2015)
Audio-visual preferences, perception, and use of water features in open-plan offices
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (March 2020)
Unmasking the effects of masking on performance: The potential of multiple-voice masking in the office environment
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (August 2015)