Download Effects of Noise and Blood Pressure and Heart Rate in

University of Central Florida
Retrospective Theses and Dissertations
Masters Thesis (Open Access)
Effects of Noise on Blood Pressure and Heart Rate
in Deaf Adults
1974
Albert R. Bartee
University of Central Florida
Find similar works at: http://stars.library.ucf.edu/rtd
University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu
Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons
STARS Citation
Bartee, Albert R., "Effects of Noise on Blood Pressure and Heart Rate in Deaf Adults" (1974). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 87.
http://stars.library.ucf.edu/rtd/87
This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and
Dissertations by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected].
EFFECTS OF NOISE ON BLOOD PRESSURE A1D HEART RATE
IN DEAF ADULTS
BY
ALBERT ROSS BARTEE
THESIS
Submitted in partial fulfill ment of th e requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts
in the Graduate Studi es Program of
Florida Technological Univer sity
Orlando, Florida
1974
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I would like to express appreciation to all those individuals
without whose help this study would not have become a reality.
To my Committee Chairman and friend, Dr. Thomas A. Mullin, whose
professionalism, attention to detail and constant encouragement has made
my experience at F.T.U., both enriching and pleasurable.
MY
gratitude is also extended to other members of my Committee:
Dr. Robert Arnold and Dr. Thomas MOrgan and a sincere thank you to
Dr. Albert Pryor, who although not an official member of my Committee
gave unselfishly of his time and expertise.
Others who have helped this thesis become a reality are Dr.
Raymond Buchanan, Dr. David Barr, and Dr. Charles Dziuban and Mrs.
Janice FitzGerald.
Finally my appreciation is extended to my loving wife, Tiny, for
her patience and confidence and to my son Michael, who gave of his
time.
ii
to my mother and father
in appreciation of their never ending faith and
everlasting encouragement
this thesis is affectionately dedicated
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
INrRODUCTION AND RATIONALE •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
The Auditory Mechanism • • • • • • • • • • • •
The Effects of Noise • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Normal Hearing Individuals • • • • • • • • • •
Deaf Individuals • • • • •
• • • • • • • • •
METHODOLOGY
•
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
6
• • • • •
• • • • •
• • • • •
•
• • •
............. ..............
~
•
•
9
•
•
10
10
• • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • •• • • • • • • •
12
• • • • •
• • •
•
• • • • •
• • • • •
• • • • •
• •
• •
• • • • •
• • •
• • • • •
• • • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • •
• •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
Heart Rate • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Systolic Blood Pressure •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Diastolic Blood Pressure • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
DISCUSSION
•
•
•
0
•
8 .
8
8
8
8
8
8
9
0
. . . .- . .
1
2
3
4
5
Test Site • • • • • • • • • •
Subjects •
• • • • • • • •
Instrumentation • • • • • • •
Rooms
• • • • • • • • •
Pure Tones
• • • • • • •
Calibration • • • • • • •
Stimulus Presentation
• • •
Blood Pressure and Heart Rate
Stimulus Materials • • • • •
Procedures
• • • • • • •
RESULTS
vii
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
0
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
vi
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
12
17
•
25
•
Heart Rate
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Systolic Blood Pressure
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Diastolic Blood Pressure • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Pathology
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Implications for Further Research •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • •
iv
12
• •
• •
•
25
26
26
28
28
Page
S~RY
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
APPENDIX A.
APPENDIX B.
APPENDIX C.
APPENDIX D.
APPENDIX E.
30
.....
Audiogram Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Test Instructions • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
33
Differences from Base Rate Scores for Heart Rate
and Blood Pressure • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
34
Raw Scores
• • • • • • • • • • • •
40
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
46
Permissible Noise Exposure Limits Chart • • •
• • • • • • • •
LIST OF REFERENCES • • • •
•
..
v
31
32
LIST OF TABLES
Table
I
II
III
Page
3 x 5 Analysis of Variance for Heart Rate for
Stimuli ~f No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
......
13
Mean Average for Heart .Rate for Stimuli of No
Noise, . White Noise and 250 Hz • • • • • • • • • • • • •
14
3 x 5 Analysis of Variance for Systolic Blood
Pressure for Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and
250 Hz • • " • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
IV
v
VI
VII
T Test for Systolic Blood Pressure Between 15
Minute No Noise and 15 Minute 250 Hz • • • • ~
• • •
16
• • • • •
18
Mean Average for Systolic Blood Pressure for
Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz • •
• • • •
20
3 x 5 Analysis of Variance for Diastolic Blood
Pressure for Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise
and 250 Hz
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • •
21
Mean Average for Diastolic Blood Pressure for
Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
• •
.
24
.
vi
• •
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure
I
II
III
Page
Composite of Mean Scores for Heart Rate for
Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
•
• • • • •
Composite of Mean Scores for Systolic Blood
Pressure for Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and
250Hz • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
•
Composite of Mean Scores for Diastolic Blt'Od
Pressure for Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and
250 Hz • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
vii
15
•
19
• •
23
•
Introduction and Rationale
Our bodies are in a delicate state of equilibrium.
This state can be
disturbed in many ways. : ordinarily there are built-in systems in the body
which tend to preserve this internal and autonomic equilibrium.
It now
appears, however, that noise is a factor which can produce disturbances
in various physiological activities of the human body (Kryter, 1970).
Not until recently has noise as a form of pollution attracted attention.
While noise was once thought of as a by-product unique to industry,
it has now spread to our cities and into our environment (Welch, 1970).
Some communities already have noise levels which exceed those found in
industry (Sataloff, 1957).
It has long been known (Kryter, 1970 and Peterson and Gross, 1972)
that noise exposure causes hearing loss; however, more recent studies
indicate that other non-auditory effects on one's body can also take
place as a result of such exposure.
High noise levels of 120-150
decibels (dB) at certain resonant frequencies of body structures can
produce noticeable symptomatic reactions (Sataloff, 1957).
Even moderate
noise levels produce temporary changes in the size of some blood vessels,
although it is not known how much these effects eventually produce
permanent change
(Bail~y,
1969).
The production of stress and fatigue by noise exposure is difficult
to verify in a meaningful way though these effects cannot be ignored.
So
great is this concern over the hazardous effects of noise on man that the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) of the United States
2
Department of Labor recently set guidelines for the protection of workers
in noisy areas.
These standards apply to every working man and woman in
the United States.
These guidelines including the time limits individuals
are allowed to be exposed to industrial noise may be seen in Appendix A.
The Auditory Mechanism
The ear is one of the most complex and intriguing organs known to
science, and it is necessary to understand, at least in a general way, how
this delicate and intricate mechanism functions in order to appreciate more
clearly the various aspects of the problems of industrial deafness
{Sataloff, 1957).
Air conducted sound waves must travel through the outer, middle
~d
inner ear in order for hearing to occur (Davis and Silverman, 1970).
The
outer ear consists of a fleshy appendage attached to the head and the ear
canal, both of which serve to channel sound waves toward the elastic
tympanic membrane commonly known as the eardrum.
The conically shaped tY1D-
panic membrane transforms the acoustic energy into mechanical energy.
The
ossicular chain, acting as an impedance transformer transmits the vibrations
of the tympanic membrane to the oval window.
This window moves in and out,
much like a piston, generating pressure waves in the perilymph, a nearly
incompressible fluid in the inner ear.
The pressure differential that
results moves the basilar membrane and the organ of Corti.
The hair cells
in the organ of Corti transform the mechanical motions into nerve impulses,
which are transmitted through the eighth nerve into higher centers in the
brain where they are decoded and interpreted as sound.
As can be noted
then, there is no distinction made by the ear between sound and noise
(Kryter, 1970 and Rose, 1971).
3
The human ear is sensitive to sound waves vibrating at frequencies
as low as 16 cycles per second or Hertz (Hz) and to those as high as
20,000 Hz, but man will not hear any of these frequencies unless they are
loud enough.
Sataloff (1957) points out that our ears are most sensitive in the
frequency range between 1,000 and 3,000 Hz.
In this middle frequency
range it takes less sound energy for tones than it does for tones above or
below these levels.
As we grow older, higher frequency sensitivity
decreases; so that many adults are not able to hear above 12,000 Hz, and
it is not uncommon for persons to ·have difficulty hearing tones above
8,000 Hz.
The Effects of Noise
Welch and Welch (1970) postulated that noise may produce permanent
damage and actually result in a partial loss of hearing if exposure is for
long periods of time at high intensities.
They further state that noise
produces emotional reactions of annoyance, irritability, loss of attention
and other conscious factors.
It was recently reported (Bailey, 1969) that
Medical research is beginning to show that loss of hearing is
by no means the only ill effect of noise. Loud sounds cause blood
vessels to constrict, the skin to pale, muscles to tense and adrenal
hormones to be suddenly injected into the blood stream ••• Millions
of city dwellers with heart disease, high blood pressure and emotional
illnesses need protection from the additional stress of noise •••
Ears cannot shut out noise the way eyelids shut out light. The
reflex effect which causes constriction of blood vessels occurs with
equal intensity during sleep with many people showing fatigue from
their effort to remain asleep in spite of noise (p. 78).
Lehman (1956) and Tamm and Jansen (1962) found that exposure to 90 dB
Sound Pressure Level (SPL) or white noise caused vasoconstriction of blood
vessels which persisted for the duration of the noise.
This condition
persisted to the same degree in persons long accustomed to such noise as it
did to those not regularly exposed to it.
4
Normal Hearing Individuals.
Rosen et al., (1962) studied the hearing
of an isolated primitive black tribe in southeast Sudan, the Maabans.
These people live in an environment where noise rarely exceeds 40 db
Sound Pressure Level.
It was reported that they never have high blood
pressure, and coronary heart disease is unknown.
have better hearing with aging.
They live longer and
Rosen concluded that a single burst of
white noise of 90 dB will not damage hearing; however, when an individual
is exposed to such noise for many years, a cochlear hearing loss results.
If an individual has a disorder such as atherosclerosis or coronary heart
disease, this noise exposure could be harmful.
Levi (1967) reported an increase in excretion of catecholamines
(chemicals excreted by the endocrine glands - found in urine) as a result
of workers being subjected to work in industrial noise.
Arguelles et -al.,
- (1970) support Levi's findings and reported that
exposure of normal, hypertensive and psychotic patients to a sound of
2,000 Hz for 30 minutes at an intensity of 90 dB caused endocrine
disturbances (hormonal secretions).
in many hypertensive patients.
Blood pressure rose significantly
Noise proved to be an important stressing
agent capable of causing disturbances in cardiovascular and psychotic
subjects.
Kryter (1970) points out it is conceivable that intense low frequency sounds below 20 Hz
effects on man.
(infr~sonic)
could have particularly adverse
In addition to possible stimulation of the vestibular
system and pain in the ear, sound in the region of 10-75 Hz could
cause resonant vibrations in the chest, throat and nose cavities.
Sataloff (1957) indicated a tickling sensation may be present in
the ears, nose and throat and that we also may feel our skulls vibrate
5
in the presence of intense noise.
A similar sensation in the chest may
occasionally produce nausea and vomiting in some individuals. These
findings agree with the data of Davis (1948), Brewer and Breiss (1960)
MOhr (1965) and Peterson and Gross (1972).
Deaf Individuals.
The term deaf applies to those in whom the sense
of hearing is non-functional for the ordinary purposes of life (Katz,
1972).
In this study no distinction will be made between those Who are born
deaf (congenitally deaf) and those who are born with normal hearing
but in whom the sense of hearing became non-functional later through
illness or accident {adventitiously deaf).
Buyniski (1958) and Kryter (1970) reported that deaf employees in
a large company made four to five times as many trips to the company
dispensary per year and suffered greater medical pathologies than did
normal hearing employees.
These authors indicated that many of their
complaints were coughs, hoarseness, otalgia and lesions often associated
with working in noisy environments.
Ades et al., (1958) exposed persons who were deaf to intense tones
and noise.
Such deaf individuals displayed similar pain levels to
intense sound as did normals.
Deaf subjects without eardrums, however,
were able to withstand pain at higher levels than those having intact
drums.
It might be concluded then that pain thresholds might be
determined by receptors in the tympanic membrane (eardrum).
Statement of the Problem
It is not an uncommon practice for large banks and Federal institutions
to hire deaf
individ~al~to
work in computer rooms, print shops or other
environments where noise often exceeds 120 dB.
The theory here is that
these people already deaf, could not have their hearing impaired by such
noise exposure and thus the employer would not be liable for additional
hearing loss encountered.
The fact that such institutions are solving an
employment problem for many of our aurally handicapped citizens, while at
the same time helping to overcome their own noise problems, may not be as
commendable as it would appear if, in fact, these employees are receiving
some adverse systemic changes due to such exposure.
There has been considerable research performed concerning the auditory
effects of noise on man; however, very few studies relating to the nonauditory or physiological effects of noise have been reported in the
literature.
Since the deaf have their auditory faculties diminished, they have
been almost entirely ignored in noise effects testing.
It is believed by Buyniski (1958) Brewer and Breiss (1960) and Kryter
(1970) that it would be helpful to learn more concerning the vibratory
(physiological) aspects of noise on the deaf.
deaf?
How much noise is harmful?
the deaf?
Is noise harmful to the
How does noise affect the bodies of
What part does noise play in the future of the deaf?
It is hoped that a thorough understanding of the effects of noise on
the deaf may be obtained and eventually provide a more reliable answer to
the now unanswered questions of the effects of noise on such individuals.
6
7
An attempt shall be made to answer the following questions:
1.
Is blood pressure significantly affected in deaf individuals who
are exposed to 110 dBA of white noise?
2.
Is blood pressure significantly affected in deaf individuals who
are exposed to a 250 Hz pure tone at 110 dBA?
3.
Is heart rate significantly affected in deaf individuals who are
exposed to 110 dBA of white noise?
4.
Is heart rate significantly affected in deaf individuals who are
exposed to a 250 Hz pure tone at 110 dBA?
Methodology
Test Site
All testing was
c~~4ucted
in the Auditory Research Laboratory at
Florida Technological University in Orlando, Florida.
Subjects
Two general requirements for all individuals included in this study
were that they had no previous participation in noise experiments and that
they were deaf.
All ten deaf individuals were subjected to the three
noise conditions--no noise, white noise and a 250 Hz pure tone.
Instrumentation
Rooms.
A testing suite (Industrial Acoustic Company Series 1200) was
used in all audiometric testing employed in this study.
The noise level
of the test room was within the standards set down by the American
Standards Association for a room to be used for audiologic testing.
Pure-tones.
Pure tone audiometries were performed using a clinical
and research audiometer (Grayson Stadler 1702).
A matched set of earphones
(Telephonics TDH 39) using MX 41 AR cushions were used for all pure-tone
testing.
A check of calibration of the audiometer was done each day prior
to testing.
Calibration.
A Sound Pressure Level Meter B and K model 2803 was
utilized to assure proper calibration of the audiometer, headsets and
sound speakers.
8
9
Stimulus Presentation.
Both the white noise and 250 Hz pure tone
were presented via sound field utilizing the Grayson Stadler (1702)
Audiometer.
A calibrated noise booster (shure) was used to increase the
intensity of the signal above normal audiometer limits.
Blood Pressure and Heart Rate.
Blood pressure and heart rate were
measured using a physiograph polygraph model projector (Narco Bio-Systems,
Inc., Type PMP-4B) equipped with a graphic recorder.
Stimulus Materials
Both of the noise stimuli were generated by the Grayson Stadler 1702
Clinical Audiometer.
The stimuli were th.en amplified to 110 dBA through
a Bozak Amplifier System and presented to the subjects in a sound field
environment.
Procedure
A calibrated check of all equipment was completed prior to each testing
session.
All individuals were given written instructions informing them
of the procedures they were to follow (see Appendix C).
After they had
read the instructions and the researcher was confident the individuals
understood them, each was asked to be seated in the testing chamber.
The pure tone air conduction hearing test that was administered to
each subject followed the guidelines recommended by Bragg (1970), and all
responses were recorded on the audiograms.
Individuals that met subject
inclusion requirements were placed in the sound suite and given a three
minute rest period.
During this
were attached to the subject.
t~e
the electrodes of the physiograph
Each subject was tested to determine base
lines of heart rate and blood pressure prior to being subjected to the
experimental conditions.
Depending upon which group the subject belonged,
he was presented with no noise or a noise stimulus of 110 dB through the
speakers.
Blood pressure and heart rate were measured and recorded
automatically for the base rate after (1) one minute, (5) five minutes,
10
11
(10) t en minutes and (15) f ifteen minutes of stimuli.
Upon completion of
the t esting, each subject was removed from the test chamber and thanked
fo r hi s coopera tion .
RESULTS
Heart Rate
Table I
represents - t~e
results of a completely randomized two
dimensional (3 x 5) Factorial Analysis of Variance for all conditions
of heart rate.
There were no F values found to be statistically
significant (P< .05) relative to heart rate (Winer, 1962).
Inspection of Table II reveals that heart rate in conditions of
no noise appeared to be consistent over all time intervals.
The mean
average heart rate was 80 beats per minute {bpm) for the 15 minute
period.
Table II further suggests that heart rate in conditions of
white noise lowered over the 15 minute period from 82 bpm to 81 bpm.
Inspection of Figure I reveals that although there were no significant F ratios obtained for heart rate in the 250 Hz condition, a 4 bpm
increase in heart rate did take place during this period.
Systolic Blood Pressure
The results of a completely randomized two dimensional (3 x 5)
Factorial Analysis of Variance for all conditions of Systolic Blood
Pressure {SBP) are presented in Table III.
{p
~
Significant F ratios
.05) were not obtained on the main effects; however, a significant
F ratio was obtained within subjects, indicating that interaction
between the noise stimulus and time presentation does exist.
For this
reason, a one-way analysis of variance was performed for all conditions
and again revealed no significant F ratios.
12
13
TABLE I
3 x 5 Analysis of Variance for Heart Rate for
Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
Source of
Variation
ss
DF
MS
F
Between Subjects:
133.3733
A
19916.90
Er
2
27
66.68667
0.090
737.6630
Within Subjects:
13.57333
J
185.2267
AJ
1333.200
Er
Legend:
A
J
Er
= Noise
= Time
= Respective
4
3.393333
8
23.15333
108
12.34444
Error Terms for Analysis
0.275
1.876
14
TABLE II
Mean Average for Heart Rate for Stimuli of
No Noise, waite Noise and 250 Hz
(1)
(5)
(10)
Base
Rate
One
Minute
Five
Minutes
Ten
No
Noise
81.80
81.80
White
Noise
82.10
Noise
Stimulus
250 Hz
Pure
Tone
Noise
Mean
Minutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Time
Mean
79.40
79.60
79.00
80.32
80.80
81.20
81.00
80.60
81.14
80.00
82.60
84.40
82.40
83.60
82.60
81.30
81.73
81.67
81.00
81.07
81.35
15
Figure I
CompOsite of Mean Scores for Heart Rate
TIME
Base
Rate
Heart
Rate
(1) One
Minute
(5) Five
Minutes
(10) Ten
Minutes
(15) Fifteen
Minutes
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
"'+----- - - - - +- - - - - - -- - - -+
79
78
77
Legend:
+
= No Noise
0
= 250
* = White
Hz
Noise
16
TABLE III
3 x 5 Analysis of Variance for Systolic Blood Pressure
for Stimuli of No
Source of
Variation
Nois~,
ss
Whtte Noise and 250 Hz
DF
MS
F
2
134.2467
0.264
27
509.3407
Between Subjects:
A
. 268.4933
Er
13752.20
Within Subjects:
J
118.4267
4
29.60667
1.862
AJ
427.5733
8
53.44667
3.362
108
15.89630
1716.800
Er
Legend:
A
J
Er
= Noise
= Time
= Respective
Error Terms for Analysis
. 17
Further t tests were performed to find the source of this interaction.
One t ratio approached significance at the {p< .05) on the
one tailed test, however, since no directional hypotheses were formed,
the two tailed value would be more appropriate.
may be seen in Table IV.
justifiable
~or
Results of the t test
Although use of the one tailed test was not
this study, the
interacti~n
affect is noted between the
15 minute no noise and the 15 minute 250 Hz condition.
An increase in
SBP for both white noise and 250 Hz is demonstrated over the control
condition for the same period.
No Noise.
Inspection of Figure II indicates that.SBP for conditions
of no noise remained at the base rate level of 115 millimeters mercury
(mm) at one minute, and at the five minute measurement.
SBP increased
at the 10 minute measure to 117 mm and reduced to 112 mm at the
fifteen minute reading.
for the entire fifteen
White Noise.
As can be observed in Table V, the mean SBP
minut~
time period was 115 mm.
Table V further reveals that the SBP for the 250 Hz
condition increased relative to the base rate at all time periods.
The greatest increase, as can be seen in this table, was noted at the
fifteen minute reading where the SBP score elevated 8 mm.
The mean
of all readings during the 250 Hz condition was 118 mm or an increase
of 4 mm in the SBP over the base rate.
Diastolic Blood Pressure
Table VI represents the results of a completely randomized two
dimensional (3 x 5) Factorial Analysis of Variance for all conditions
of Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP).
There were no F values found to be
18
TABLE IV
T Test for Systolic Blood Pressure Between
15 Min~te No Noise and 15 ~finute 250 Hz
Number of Observations in Sample
No Noise
250 Hz
10.000
10.000
Arithmetic Mean
No Noise
250 Hz
112.5000
122.4000
Standard Deviation
No Noise
250 Hz
11.0204
10.4709
Estimated Standard Deviation of Populations
No Noise
250 Hz
11.6165
11.0373
Estimated Standard Error of Mean
No Noise
250 Hz
3.6734
3.4903
Absolute Value of the Difference
9.9000
T Statistic
1. 9537
19
Figure II
Composite of Mean Scores for Systolic Blood Pressure
Systolic
Blood
Pressure
Base
Rate
(1) One
Minute
TIME
(5) Five
Minutes
(10) Ten
Minutes
(15) Fifteen
Minutes
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
-_..+--- ----:.-
115
,
"' "'
'
''
\
'\
'
114
113
112
111
110
Legend:
-~'
~
~
+ = No Noise
* ·=White Noise
0 = 250 Hz
'
\
'\
+
20
TABLE V
Mean Average for Systolic Blood Pressure for Stimuli of
No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
(1)
(5)
(10)
(15)
Base
Rate
One
Minute
Five
Minutes
Ten
Minutes
Fifteen
Minutes
Time
Mean
No
Noise
115.00
115.50
115.30
117.20
112.50
115.10
White
Noise
. 117.20
116.70
116.10
116.90
118.20
117.02
114.30
116.10
119.90
118.10
122.40
118.16
115.50
116.10
117.10
117.40
117.70
116.82
Noise
Stimulus
250 Hz
Pure
Tone
Noise
Mean
21
TABLE VI
3 x 5 Analysis of Variance for Diastolic Blood Pressure
for Stimuli of No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
Source of
Variation
ss
DF
MS
F
15.70667
0.038
Between Subjects:
31.41333
A
11261.76
Er
2
27
417.1022
Within Subjects:
64.37333
J
4
16.09333
1.919
16.62333
1.982
AJ
132.9867
8
Er
905.8400
108
Legend:
A
= Noise
J =
Er
T~me
= Respective
Error Terms for Analysis
8.387407
22
statistically significant (p< .OS) relating to DBP.
There was an
F ratio that approached significance (p<: .OS) within subjects.
This
would suggest interaction between the noise stimuli and the time
presentations.
This interaction is further illustrated in Figure III.
Because of this suggested interaction a one-way analysis of
variance was performed for all conditions..
There were no F values
found to be statistically -significant . (p <.OS) for the DBP.
No Noise.
As can be observed in Table VII, the mean DBP for the
entire fifteen minute period was 71 mm which represents an increase of
only 1 mm .over the base rate.
White Noise.
Table VII further illustrates that the mean DBP for
the lS minute period was 71 mm, the same as the base rate score for
this condition.
Interaction exists between the white noise and the
no noise stimuli at the five minute reading only.
2SO Hz.
Although there were no significant F ratios obtained
for DBP for the 3 x S analysis or the one-way analysis, these scores
did increase as a function of time from a base line score of 70 mm
to a score of 74 mm at the 15 minute interval.
The mean DBP for all
time intervals was 72 mm or an increase of 2 mm over the base rate.
Interaction existed between 2SO Hz and white noise at the five minute
reading.
A t test was performed which again revealed no significant
t ratios for conditions of DBP.
23
Figure III
Composite of Mean Scores for Diastolic Blood Pressure
Diastolic
Blood
Pressure
TIME
, Base
Rate
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
Legend:
+ = No Noise
* = White Noise
0 = 250 Hz
(1) One
(5) Five
(10) Ten
Minute
Minutes
Minutes
(15) Fifteen
Minutes
24
TABLE VII
Mean Average for Diastolic Blood Pressure for Stimuli of
No Noise, White Noise and 250 Hz
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Time
Mean
70.40
71.70
71.70
70.30
70.76
70.70
73.50
70.80
70.60
71.40
71.40
70.10
70.60
72.30
74.00
74.40
72.28
70.17
71.50
·71.60
72.10
72.03
71.48
(1)
(5)
Base
Rate
One
Minute
No
Noise
69.70
White
Noise
Noise
Stimulus
250 Hz
Pure
Tone
Noise
Mean
DISCUSSION
Heart Rate
Although heart rate increased when subjects were exposed to
110 dBA of 250 Hz tone over the 15 minute period and decreased in the
presence of White noise at the same intensity (qv. Figure I), these
differences were not found to be statistically significant.
As may be observed in Table II, heart rate generally decreased in
the control condition as a function of time.
This decrease may be the
result of the subject simply relaxing since no adverse stimuli was
being presented and all subjects were assumed to be aware of the procedures being followed.
Examination of heart rate differences from
base rate in the 250 Hz condition at the 15 minute time interval
revealed seven of the ten subjects to have elevated heart rates
(see Appendix D).
Further inspection of Appendix D revealed, as expected, that heart
rate in the no noise condition remained the same or decreased from
the base rate over the 15 minute session.
An unexpected observation, however, was revealed in the white noise
condition (qv. Table II) where heart rate also generally reduced as a
function of time, similar to the pattern found in the no noise condition.
One might reason that white noise may have an anesthetic effect on some
individuals (reported by Stevens, 1966) which may bring about a reduction
of cardiac . rhythm.
Since all of these subjects were deaf, it is
25
26
possible that the vibratory rather than the acoustic _transmission may
be an important consideration in determining the use of such anesthetic
techniques •.
Systolic Blood Pressure
Measurement of the
~BP
and DBP were analyzed separately.
Although
there were no significant F values obtained between subjects, a
significant F ratio was obtained within subjects.
The significance
here may be explained as interaction between the noise ·conditions and
the time intervals.
The combination of the noise conditions and the
time intervals and their relationship to each other as factors of the
design, may have created an internal imbalance within the analysis of
variance, thus creating the significant F ratio within subjects and
negating
~he
F ratio between subjects.
Further examination was
performed within subjects using t tests.
The only result that approached
significance may be observed in Table VII.
It would seem justifiable to conclude that specific noises do
indeed produce systemic body changes at 110 dBA.
The specific
acoustic signal of 250 Hz produced an increase from 114 mm to 122 mm
over the 15 minute period (qv. Table V).
The significance here is
probably due to the large SBP difference (8 mm) from base readings
occuring at the 15 minute measurement.
Diastolic Blood Pressure
Although there was an increase in the DBP, from the base rate
over the 15 minute period f9r the 250 Hz stimulus, no significant F
ratios were found between subjects, however, this analysis d'id
27
approach significance within subjects.
This may be suggestive of
interaction between noise conditions and time intervals.
If these
results were significant, the combination of the noise conditions and
the time intervals and their relationship to each other as factors of
the design, may have created an internal imbalance within the analysis
of variance, thus creating the significant F ratio within subjects
and negating the F ratio between subjects.
It would seem· that neither noise nor time contingencies alone
produced statistically significant differences in the DBP, however,
an
increasi~g
DBP for the 250 Hz condition may be noted by examination
of the raw data as illustrated in Appendix E.
Whereas during white noise there appeared to be a decreasing
trend in DBP from the base rate, it might have been hypothesized by
a priori reasoning that given a longer period, white noise would tend
to reduce DBP.
Likewise, the 250 Hz condition, if continued for a
longer period · ·w ould terid · to give an elevated DBP reading:
It would appear that white noise has its greatest affects at the
one minute level which might be explained as a function of subject
adaptation; that is, the initial traumatic effect of the noise is
adjusted to by the subject and, therefore, systemic changes over a
longer time are not of the same magnitude as noted at the onset of the
noise.
Such adaptation to noise exposure, according to the research
on normal hearing individuals reported earlier, has not been found.
It would appear that the SBP and the DBP act somewhat independently
under noise conditions of 250 Hz.
28
As was noted earlier, the 250 Hz signal produced an increase in
SBP of 8 mm over the 15 minute period, whereas DBP for the same period
increased only 4
~·
White noise readings, however, for both SBP and DBP, produced
increases of 1 mm for the 15 minute time period.
Pathology
As indicated earlier, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) established guidelines for ear protection in workers
exposed to excessive noise.
It would seem, however, that deaf workers
are ignored with this legislation since they have already supposedly
lost all audition.
In addition to hearing loss, this study indicates
that physiological changes in heart rate and blood pressure do result
from noise exposure.
Deaf individuals, as well as normals, who may
suffer from arteriosclerosis, hypertension and cardiac problems in
general should not be exposed to such environmental health hazzards.
Other complications such as glacoma, diabetes, hearing impairment,
vascular and nervous disorders, to name a few, are also aggravated by
blood pressure and heart rate increase and thus the deaf individual
should not be inflicted with this
form ~ of
pollution.
These noise
conditions would seem to tend to shorten life span and decrease somatic
efficiency.
Implications for Further Research
A measure of skin resistance alterations might be of interest in
studying physiological changes occuring as a result of noise exposure.
Through use of a psychogalvanometer and/or a Palmer sweat instrument,
a researcher might be able to gain insight on additional vibratory
29
reactions to intense noise stimulation.
Such autonomic reflexes
measured in this fashion may have implications toward understanding the
anesthetic effect of white noise as suggested by this research.
The trends noted by examination of the raw data suggest that if
either variables of .time or intensity of the noise were increased
both heart rate and blood pressure would also elevate.
Since many
individuals are exposed to noise for many hours during a work day, a
measure of these effects over a longer duration may be of importance
with respect to the overall health of the individual.
Deaf workers employed in noisy environments are rarely exposed
to discrete frequencies such as 250 Hz or, on the other hand, to noise
with as wide a spectrum as white noise.
Other noise including the
steady state and impact type typical of industry, though not as
efficient for experimental control, would be of interest in assessing
physiological effects upon deaf workers and would deserve consideration
for further investigation.
SUMMARY
A review of the literature reveals that experimentation with the
.
· deaf has been limited in the area of noise exposure.
This is partially
because the deaf already have their auditory mechanism destroyed and,
therefore, it is assumed that no further damage could occur to the
auditory mechanism.
It was decided to investigate the physiological
effects of noise, if any, upon the deaf.
All subjects were seated in a sound treated chamber and exposed
to 110 dBA of white noise and 250 Hz pure tone in a sound field
environment.
dition.
A no noise period was also employed as a control con-
Heart rate and blood pressure were measured just prior to
each noise exposure (base rate) and then again at 1, 5, 10, and 15
minutes after the onset of the noise.
All subjects were exposed to
all conditions using a counter balanced design and measurements were
performed during one setting with appropriate rest periods between
conditions.
These heart rate and blood pressure findings were subjected to
analysis of variance.
Results of this treabment yielded a significant
F ratio for SBP within subjects and approached significance within
subjects for DBP.
It would appear that from results of this study that the Federal
Government and industry should be made aware of the possible harmful
effects of noise exposure to the deaf.
30
APPENDIX A
31
APPENDIX A
Occupational Safety and Health Administration Guidelines
for Noise Exposure of Workers
Protection against the effects of noise exposure shall be provided
when the sound level exceeds those shown on Table I of this section when
measured on the A scale of a standard sound level meter at slow response •••
TABLE I
Permissible Noise Exposures
Sound
Level
dBA slow
Duration per
day, hours
8
90
6
92
4
95
3
97
2
100
1~
102
1
105
~
110
%or
115
less
The abbreviation of dB in the right-hand column of the table stands
for decibels, the unit of measurement of sound levels.
The A scale is one
of several on the sound level meter, a measuring instrument used to determine
sound intensity.
On this scale, the instrument reacts in much the same way
as does the human ear.
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B
32
FLORIDA TECHNOLOGICAL
BOX 25000
UNIVERSITY
ORLANDO, FLORIDA
tARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION
)2816
Report of Audiologic Evaluation
Date
·In·
125
- - - Sex_____
Age
Audiogram
Audi ogram Key
FREQUENCY IN CYCLES PER SECOND
AIR CONDUCTION
250
500
2000
1000
~000
1500
750
0 Right e ar (red)
X left ear (blue)
8000
3000
6000
-10
•
I
Free fie ld aided
(black)
!
With maskl ng:
I
i
0
i
0
0
10
BONE CONDUCTION
~
20
0
•
Right e ar (red)
left ear (blue)
(
( Right ear (red}
] left ear
(blue)
0
z
c 30
"'
~
:
•..
=
=
=
~0
~
z
50
(
NR
NO RESPON SE
DNT
DID NOT TEST
CNT
COULD NO T TEST
NBN = NARROW BAND NOISE
FA = FLETCHER AVERAGE
HL = HEARING LE VEL
SPL = SOUND PRE SSURE LEVEL
.
I
Ill
•
I
I
60
I
I
I
I
70
I
lI
I
80
I
Examiner
I
I
I
I
90
I
AUDIOMETER USED
:;
100
.
TYPE OF MASKING
I
I
I
I
I
110
AIC
~
t/C
I
RELIABILITY
_,__r--Rf-R- ---L- - R - - L - 1--R-- - L - - R -
-l+R-
- L - - R - -L
B/C
~MMENTS:
BEKESY RESULTS
Right:
Left:
AVERAGE LEVEL. FOR
TEST TONES
SPEECH AW<1.R~ff•lS'; THRESHOLDS
LIVE: • VOl~[
Rt
BONE: Rt
-
dB
dB lt
FIELD:
FIELD:
(Al l l
dB
........
ftEBER:
'r q
.._____
~
PB-50
OTHf.P.
Y/22
dB
Ill
Ill
PKB
OTHER
LV REC
%
lt
% It _ _ _____.
Field
- % ., -·
(All lEVElS RE CliENT'S SRT)
FVE!.S P.f NOP.MAl SRT)
--·
BING:
Right:
l~h .
far
Pos.
Pos.
Nrg.
Neg.
Pos
Pos.
l'!t"g
-------
Neg.
----
Freq.
V
at _ _ _ _._
SISI TES T RESULTS
RINNE:
Right:
Left:
V
IV
IV
Rt
~8
lf
II
II
TONE DECAV TEST
AUDIOMETRIC:
lat. to
--------
~----------
~e
Rt
dC
db lt
SPONDff:,
I
I
SPEECH DISCR IMINATION
- P.ECEr riON
(500, 1000 & 2000 cps}
AIR:
EFFECTIVE
MASKING
RE OdB HL
A/C
Decay
Freq •
Ear:
Right:
left
-
ell
?
?
APPENDIX C
33
APPENDIX C
Instructions
Hello,
MY
name is Mr. Bartee, and I am a
will be participating in an experiment
· entire process will take approximately
me assure you that you will experience
graduate student at F.T.U. You
on environmental sounds. The
forty-five (45) minutes. Let
no pain or discomfort.
First, I would like to ask you some questions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Name, age, date
Address aP.d phone number
Have you previously participated in any experiments?
If yes, were you ever involved in a study about noise?
Pure Tone Audiometries
Now I would like to conduct a simple screening hearing test.
take a seat inside the booth and relax.
Please
You are going to be listening to some tones which will sound like
· short whistles. Every time you hear a sound, press the button and release
it.. Do ~ot hold the button down, just press and release. Press the
button only· when you hear the whistle--do not guess. Do you understand?
For the next part of the experiment, I am going to attach some wires
to your wrist and leg and a blood pressure cuff on your arm. These
will help measure some of your body functions.
Next I would like you to sit back ann relax for about fifteen (15)
minutes as you will be listening to some form of environmental sounds.
Do you understand?
After the experiment is completed, please do not discuss this
experiment with your friends as we may be needing them to help us also.
Do you have any questions?
We will begin in a few minutes.
APPENDIX D
34
APPENDIX D
Heart Rate Difference from Base Line for No Noise
(1)
(5)
(10)
(15)
Ten
Minutes
Fifteen
Minutes
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
One
Minute
Five
Minutes
1
84
-4
-2
- 4
-4
2
70
-4
-4
0
0
3
76
0
-4
0
-4
4
80
0
-2
- 2
-2
5
100
+6
+8
+4
-4
6
70
0
-6
- 6
-8
7
86 .
-2
-8
-10
-6
8
80
-2
-2
0
0
9
72
0
0
0
0
10
100
+6
-4
- 4
0
35
APPENDIX D
Heart Rate Difference from Base Line in White Noise.
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
(1)
(5)
One
Minute
(15)
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
Fifteen
I.fi.nutes
0
-2
+2
+ 2
1
80 .
2
70
-4
+6
0
- 4
3
80
-4
-2
-2
+4
4
80
+4
-2
-2
+ 6
5
108
0
+2
-8
-14
6
70
-6
-6
0
- 6
7
82
0
-2
+2 .
+2
8
76
-2
44
+4
- 2
9
72
-2
-8
-4
- 2
10
103
+1
+1
-3
- 3
36
APPENDIX D
Heart ·Rate ·Difference from Base Line 250Hz Pure Tone
Subjec·t
(1)
(5)
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
1-iinutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
No.
Base
Rate
One
Minute
1
80
+4
+8
+2
+ 2
2
76
+4
+12
+12
+14
3
74
+ 2
- 2
- 2
- 2
4
80
+6
0
- 2
- 2
5
92
- 4
+18
- 2
+6
6.
66
0
+ 2
2
- 2
7
82
+10
+ 2
+2
+4
8
78
+4
0
+ 6
+ 6
9
72
- 2
2·
+4
+4
10
100
+4
+ 6
+ 6
+ 6
37
APPENDIX D
Blood Pressure Difference from Base Line in No Noise
(1)
(5)
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
One
Minute
. Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
Fifteen
Minutes
1
104
70
- 3
0
- 3
0
+4
0
- 2
0
2
108
70
+ 6
+4
- 1
+ 2
+5
+5
. - 2
+4
3
119
60
0
0
+ 1
0
+ 2
0
::_]_
0
4
106
75
- 1
+4
+4
+ 3
+2
+4
0
+4
5
128
64
- 2
0
- 4
+ 2
- 2
- 2
+ 6
- 2
6
124
86
+12
- 1
+14
+8
+18
+2
+ 8
+4
7
121
80
- 5
- 5
0
0
- 5
0
- 7
0
8
-116
.
62
- 2
+ 2
+ 2
+ 6
- 1
+4
-10
+4
9
104
58
0
- 2
+ 6
+3
+ 6
- 3
+3
120
72
0
- 2
- 5
- 4
+ 1
- 1
10
0
- 4
(15)
- 8
38
APPENDIX D
Blood Pressure Difference from Base Line in White Noise
(1)
(5)
(10)
(15)
One
Ten
Minutes
Fifteen
1-tl.nutes
Base
Rate
Minute
Five
Minutes
1 .
104
70
-3
0
-3
0
-f-4
0
- 2
0
2
115
72
-6
+7
-6
-2
0
+2
+13
- 6
3
118
70
+5
-6
0
-9
-+2
-9
+ 6
-10
4
110
78
-4
+2
-4
+1
-1
+3
+5
+ 5
5
131
62
+1
0
+5
0
+1
0
+5
- 2
6
132
86
+5
+6
-f-4
+6
+9
+3
+ 2
0
7
113
80
-2
0
-7
0
-9
-2
- 1
0
8
116
66
-2
+2
-7
-3
-6
-5
- 9
+ 2
9
115
62
-2
+8
-+2
0
-1
+2
- 3
+8
10
118
71
+1
-1
-f-4
-2
-7
- 6
0
Subject
No.
-1
39
APPENDIX D
.
.
Blood Pressure Difference from Base Line in 250 Hz Pure Tone
(1)
One
Minute
(5)
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
101
70
+9
+ 3
+10
+ 1
0
+
-6
2
110
73
-3
-2
0
+4
+ 6
+ 3
+12
+ 7
3
124
60
0
-1
- 4
+ 3
- 1
+4
+ 2
0
4
110
75
+2
+5
+11
+ 5
+11
+10
+18
+6
5
126
61
0
+1
+ 8
- 3
+2
- 3
+3
+ 1
6
130
89
+7
0
+ 1
+2
- 4
+14
+ 6
108
72
-3
+6
+ 2
0
+2
+ 8
+ 2
+ 8
8
115
66
+8
+6
+15
+ 5
+ 3
+10
+ 3
0
9
99
59
+3
-1
+15
+ 1
+11
+ 5
+12
+ 3
10
120
76
-2
+2
+ 6
- 2
+4
-
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
1
7
-5
+
2
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
7
0
+ 8
+2
APPENDIX E
40
APPENDIX
E
Raw Scores (Heart Rate) for Conditions of No Noise
(1)
(5)
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
One
Minute
Five
Minutes
1
84
80
82
.2
70
66
66
3
76
76
4
80
5
(10)
Ten
Minutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Mean
80
81
70
70
68
72
76
72
74
80
78
78
78
78
100
106
108
104
96
102
6
70
70
64
64
62
66
7
86
84
78
76
80
80
8
80
78
78
80
80
79
9
72
72
72
72
72
72
10
100
106
96
96
100
99
80
.
41
APPENDIX E
Raw Scores (Heart. Rate) for Conditions of White Noise
Base
Rate
(1)
One
Minute
1
80
80
78
82
82
80
2
70
66
76
70
66
69
3
80
76
78
78
84
79
4
80
84
78
78
86
81
5
108
108
110
100
96
104
6
70
64
64
70
64
66
7
82
82
80
84
84
82
8
76
74
80
80
74
76
9
72
70
64
68
70
68
10
103
104
104
100
100
102
Subject
No.
-
(5)
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Mean
42
APPENDIX E
· Raw Scores (Heart Rate) for Conditions of 250 Hz Pure Tone
(1)
(5)
Base
Rate
One
Minute
Five
Minutes
{10)
Ten
}:.inutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Mean
1
80
84
88
82
82
83
2
76
80
88
88
90
84
3
74
76
72
72
72
73
4
80
86
80
78
78
80
5
92
88
110
90
98
95
6
66
66
68
64
64
65
7
82
92
84
84
86
85
8
78
80
78
84
84
80
9
72
70
70
. 76
76
72
10
100
104
106
106
106
104
Subject
No.
43
APPENDIX E
Raw Scores (Blood
. ~ressure) fo~
(1)
One
Minute ..
Conditions of No Noise
{5)
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Mean
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
1
104
70
101
70
101
70
108
70
102
70
103
70
2
108
70
114
74
107
72
113
75
106
74
109
73
·3
119.
60
119
60
120
60
121
60
112
60
118
60
4
106
75
105
79
110
78
108
79
106
79
107
78
5
128
64
126
64
124
66
126
62
134
62
127
63
6
127
86
136
85
138
94
142
88
132
90
134
88
7
121
80
116
80
118
80
116
80
114
80
117
80
8
116
62
114
64
118
68
115
66
106
66
113
65
9
104
58
104
58
102
61
107
64
101
61
103
60
10
120
72
120
70
115
68
116
73
112
• 71
116
70
44
APPENDIX E
Raw· Scores (Blood Pressure) for Conditions of White Noise
Subject
No.
Base
Rate
One
Minute
Five
Minutes
(10)
Ten
Minutes
1
104
70
101
70
101
70
108
70
102
70
103
70
2
115
72
108
79
108
70
115
70
128
66
114
71
3
118
70
-121
64
118
61
120
61
124
60
120
63
4
110
78
106
80
108
79
109
81
115
83
109
80
5
131
62
137
62
136
62
132
62
136
60
134
61
6
132
86
137
92
136
92
141
89
134
86
136
89
7
113
80
111
80
106
80
109
78
112
80
110
8
116
66
114
68
109
63
110
61
107
68
111
65
9
115
62
113
70
117
62
114
114
64
112
70
10
118
71
119
70
122
69
111
70
112
71
116
72
(1)
(5)
(15)
Fifteen
Minutes
Mean
79
65
LIST OF REFERENCES
LIST OF REFERENCES
Ades, H. W., Davis, H., El~redge, D. H., Von Gierke, H. E., Halstead,
W. C., Hardy, J. D., Miles, W. R., Neff, W. D., Rudnick, I., Ward, Jr.,
A. A. and Warren, D. R. Benox Report - An Exploratory Study of the
Biological Effects of Noise. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1953.
.
Arguelles, A. E. et al., Endocrine and Metabolic Effects of Noise on
Normal, Hypertensive and Psychotic Subjects. Physiological
Effects of Noise. New York: Plenum Press, 1970.
Bailey, A.
Noise Is a Slow Agent of Death.
New York Times, 1969.
Bragg, V. C. Accomplishing the Pure Tone Audiogram.
Audiological Library Series, 1970, VII, 15.
Maico
Brewer, D. W. and Breiss, F. B. Industrial Noise: Laryngeal Considerations. New York State Journal of Medicine, 1960, 60, 1737-1740.
Buyniski, E. F. Noise and Employee Health.
No. 6, 45-46.
Noise Control, 1958, 4,
Davis, H. and Silverman, R. Hearing and Deafness.
Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970.
New York:
Holt,
Griffith, J. (Ed.). Persons with Hearing Loss.
Charles Thomas Publisher, 1969.
Springfield, Illinois:
Katz, J. (Ed.). Handbook of Clinical Audiology.
Williams and Wilkins, 1972.
Baltimore, Maryland:
Kryter, K. D.
1970.
The Effects of Noise on Man.
New York:
Academic Press,
Lehmann, G. and Tamm, J. (1956). Uber Veranderungen der Kreisla uf
dynamik des ruhenden Menschen unter Einwirkung von Gerauschen.
Physiological Effects of Noise. New York: Plenum Press, 1970.
Levi, L. Sympatho-Adrenomedullary Responses to Emotional Stimuli:
Methodologic, Physiologic and Pathologic Considerations. In
An Introduction to Clinic Neuroendocrinology (E. Bajusz, Ed.).
S. Karager, Basel, 1967.
Mohr, G. c., Cole, J. N., Guild, E., and Von Gierke, H. E. Effects of
Low Frequency and Infrasonic Noise on Man. Aerospace Medicine,
1965, 36, 817-824.
46
47
Peterson, A. and Gross, Jr., E. E. Handbook of Noise Measurement.
(7th ed.) Concord, Massachusetts: General Radio Co., 1972.
Rainer, J. D. (Ed.). Family Mental Health Problems in a Deaf
Population. (2d ed.) Charles Thomas Publisher, 1969.
Rose, D. E. Audiological Assessment.
Prentice Hall, Inc., 1971.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Rosen, s., Bergman, M., · Plestor, D., El-MOfty, A., and Satti, M.
Presbycussis. Study of a Relatively Noise Free Population in the
Sudan. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, Laryngology, 1962, 71,
727-743.
Sataloff, J.
Industrial Deafness.
New York:
McGraw Hill, 1957.
Stevens, S. S. (Ed.). Handbook of Experimental Psychology.
John Wiley and Son, Inc., 1966.
u.s.
New York:
Department of Labor. Guidelines to the Department of Labor's
Occupational Noise Standards. Washington: Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (Federal Register Section 1910.95,
October 18, 1972).
Welch, B. L. and Welch, A. S. Physiological Effects of Noise.
New York: Plenum Press, 1970.
Winer, B. J., Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, Series in
Psychology, New York: McGraw Hill Co., 1962.