![Page layout description [25]](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378519487/figure/tbl1/AS:11431281226206455@1709102128705/Page-layout-description-25_Q320.jpg)
![Respondents' response to the question of the location where they experience the effects of noise as disturbing [26]](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378519487/figure/tbl4/AS:11431281226206458@1709102129098/Respondents-response-to-the-question-of-the-location-where-they-experience-the-effects_Q320.jpg)
Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
TEM Journal. Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 62-67, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06, February 2024.
62 TEM Journal – Volume 13 / Number 1 / 2024.
The Influence of Environmental Noise on the
Living and Working Conditions of the
Population - Slovak Case Study
Ivana Tureková P
1
P, Iveta Marková P
2
P, Peter Brečka P
1
P,P PHilda Hyneková P
1
P, Marek Kóša P
1
P
1
PConstantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Faculty of Education, Department of Techniques and
Information Technologies, Dražovská 4, 949 74, Nitra, Slovakia
P
2
PUniversity of Žilina, Faculty of Security Engineering, Department of Fire Engineering, 1. mája 32
01026 Žilina
Abstract – Physical stressors like noise can have a
significant impact on both the environment and the
health of people who are exposed to it. In particular,
the excessive noise produced by road traffic is a highly
topical issue. The study aimed to investigate the traffic
noise values on a busy road in the town of Turzovka. In
addition to comparing the measured results with the
limit values, we conducted a questionnaire survey with
fifty residents. The questionnaire surveyed the
attitudes of fifty town residents towards traffic noise
concerning their quality of life and health.
Subsequently, we compared the questionnaire survey
results with the measured noise values at a measured
site on a busy road in Turzovka. The respondents'
answers from the questionnaire survey confirmed that
68% of the respondents felt the impact of noise
exposure on their health, which corresponded with the
results of the accurate measurements. According to the
measurements, the critical time zones were from 5:00
to 6:00 and from 16:00 to 17:00. The final part of the
thesis consists of the proposed measures, whose
implementation can decrease the potential high noise
exposure and thus reduce the health risks associated
with the noise issue.
DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06
34TUhttps://doi.org/10.18421/TEM131-06U34T
Corresponding author: Ivana Tureková,
Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Faculty of
Education, Department of Techniques and Information
Technologies, Dražovská 4, 949 74, Nitra, Slovakia
Email: 34TUiturekova@ukf.skU34T
Received: 28 August 2023.
Revised: 02 November 2023.
Accepted: 29 November 2023.
Published: 27 February 2024.
© 2023 Ivana Tureková et al; published by
UIKTEN. This work is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0
License.
The article is published with Open Access at
Uhttps://www.temjournal.com/
Keywords – Noise, burden, objectivisation,
questionnaire, health, measures.
1. Introduction
Noise is a physical factor that is responsible for
several other damages to health in addition to
damage to the hearing organ. Among the most
important manifestations are a decrease in quality,
disorders of psychosocial well-being [1], [2].
Unlike other physical factors, people perceive
noise by a specific auditory system. Thus, it is a
phenomenon everyone perceives and evaluates,
which is why noise exposure is one of the most
common, if not the most frequent, complaints of
residents living in large cities [3], [4]. Traffic is the
most frequently cited noise source in these cities and
their surroundings [5].
Many studies have focused on the generation of
road traffic noise [6], addressing the effect of
roadway type on annoyance to residents [7], [8].
Other authors have addressed annoyance when
considering traffic characteristics [9], [10], motorised
two-wheelers, and heavy vehicles [11], [12], but have
also taken into account the influence of road surface
type.
A noise risk assessment system is based on the
relationship between noise exposure levels and the
likelihood of adverse health effects. [13], [14].
In 2011, the WHO published research on the
burden of disease from environmental noise. The
survey resulted in data on the loss of healthy years in
people due to environmental noise [15], [16].
Based on the research, information was obtained to
quantify the noise burden for cardiovascular diseases,
cognitive disorders in children, sleep disorders,
tinnitus, and crankiness [17], [18].
According to research, after air pollution,
environmental noise is the second most important
factor contributing to the morbidity of society [19],
[20], [22].
TEM Journal. Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 62-67, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06, February 2024.
TEM Journal – Volume 13 / Number 1 / 2024. 63
The European survey on quality of life in 2016-
2017 on a sample of 37,000 respondents from all EU
member states and five candidate countries
confirmed that one third of respondents (32%) have
problems with environmental noise [23], [21].
Countries, regions, and cities are taking various
measures to tackle noise-related problems. In order to
reduce and limit noise, roads are paved with anti-
noise asphalt, cities are building more infrastructure
for electric vehicles, quiet tyres are preferred for road
transport, streets are transformed into pedestrian
zones, and parks and nature reserves are created [24].
In Slovak legislation, the permissible noise levels
for road transport (Laeq,p) are set by Decree No
549/2007 Z. z. (Table 1).
Table 1. Page layout description [25]
Permissible sound levels for road traffic (Laeq,p)
Territory
category
Territory -
description of the protected
Permissible values in
dB
day
evening
night
I.
• special protection
against noise (spa
places, medical and spa
areas)
45 45 40
II.
• under the windows of
family houses and
residential living rooms,
the space under the
windows of protected
rooms of school
buildings, medical
facilities, exterior space
in recreational and
residential areas
50
50
45
III.
• category II, which
includes the
surroundings of
motorways, class I and
II roads, local roads
with public transport,
railways, airports and
town centres
60
60
50
IV.
• without residential
function, without
protected exterior
spaces, factory
premises, industrial
parks and production
zones
70
70
70
The study's main objective was to determine the
level of noise pollution from traffic in the town of
Turzovka by accurate measurements (screening) and
to compare the results of the measurements with the
maximum permissible values. By asking the
inhabitants of Turzovka, we obtained their opinions
on the noise burden and their subjective perception of
environmental noise and its harmful effects on their
health and well-being.
Turzovka is a small town in the northwest of
Slovakia with 7121 inhabitants. It is located near the
border with the Czech Republic, and the road from
Čadca to the Czech border village of Makov runs
around it. It is a Class II road number 487, a crucial
traffic junction with high traffic frequency and with
an assumption of an increased level of noise
pollution (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Geographical location of Turzovka
(https://www.enviroportal.sk/indicator/detail?id=521)
2. Methods
The study was conducted in two stages. In the first
stage, real measurements were taken in the village of
Turzovka. In the second stage, a questionnaire survey
of residents was carried out, in which they expressed
their opinion, how they perceive environmental noise
and its impact on their health.
2.1. Design of Experimental Measurement
The determination of the noise measurement sites
preceded the actual experimental measurement.
Therefore, by observing the number of cars during
the day, we determined the location and the time
periods for measuring. We took into account the
following aspects:
- the crossroads of the main road Makov - Čadca
and the contact with the main road to the Czech
Republic;
- a specific place – the boundary of the first
inhabited house;
- measurement time at the highest noise load
(highest number of passing cars).
A graphical view of the measurement site is in
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Identification of the measurement point
TEM Journal. Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 62-67, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06, February 2024.
64 TEM Journal – Volume 13 / Number 1 / 2024.
We made the measurements using a compact noise
meter type UNI – T UT353 (UNI-TREND
TECHNOLOGY, CO., LTD., China), designed to
measure and control the noise level in buildings,
outdoor areas, in the vicinity of residences, near
highways, railway lines, or even performs loudness
measurements of various equipment. The specific
measuring instrument is shown in Figure 3, and
Table 2 presents its technical parameters.
Figure 3. Measuring instrument UNI ‒ T UT353
(https://www.tipa.sk/sk/hlukomer-uni-t-ut353/d-
174949/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIssqR7dGw9gIVh7LVCh0NmQC
UEAQYASABEgLVzPD_BwE)
Table 2. Parameters of noise meter type UNI – T UT353
Sound pressure level measurement
range
30 – 130 dB
Measurement deviation
± 1.5 dB
Microphone range (measurement
frequency range)
3.5 – 8 000 Hz
Measurement response speed
125 ms/1s
We carried out the measurements over two days
(29 November 2022 and 30 November 2022), during
which the temperature ranged between 8 and 10 °C
during the day and between 3 and 4 °C in the
morning and evening hours. The hours of the
measurements taken are in Table 3.
Table 3. Measurement timetable (marked with red colour)
date
05:00 - 06:00
06:00 - 07:00
07:00 - 08:00
08:00 - 09:00
09:00 - 10:00
10:00 - 11:00
11:00 - 12:00
12:00 - 13:00
13:00 - 14:00
14:00 - 15:00
15:00 - 16:00
16:00 - 17:00
17:00 - 18:00
18:00 - 19:00
19:00 - 20:00
29.11
.
1st measurement
2nd measurement
30.11.
3rd measurement
The noise level meter was placed 2m from the road
boundary and at a height of 1.5m from the ground
(Figure 2). We recorded measurement values every 5
minutes. The measurements also included road traffic
intensity.
We divided the different types of vehicles into
trucks over 3.5 tonnes (including suburban public
transport), the next group was vans up to 3.5 tonnes
and, in the last group were cars.
3. Results
Figure 4 shows the results of the measurements of
the equivalent noise level averaged in dB (Laeq,p)
including the number of personal cars in the
distribution of cars over 3.5 tonnes, vans under 3.5
tonnes and cars.
Figure 4. Measured values of noise exposure concerning
road traffic frequency and time of measurements
The results show that not only trucks but also cars
or several aspects such as vehicle speed, engine type,
vehicle speed, road type, and asphalt quality
influence the noise level. We found exceeding the
permissible noise level for the reference time (day)
set at 60 dB, with 74.3 dB and 71.7 dB recorded in
the 5:00 - 6:00, 71.7 dB in the 6:00 - 7:00 and 70.4
dB in the afternoon, from 16:00 - 17:00 time periods
respectively.
4. Questionnaire Survey
People from the town of Turzovka were contacted
at the site of the noise measurements to express their
opinion on how they perceive the noise exposure
from traffic. The questionnaire consisted of 14
questions, of which one was open-ended, and three
questions were 5 Likert-scaled. The scaling was as
follows: 1 - noise does not bother me; 2 - noise does
not bother me, but I perceive it; 3 - noise bothers me,
but I can stand it; 4 - noise bothers me to a
considerable extent; 5 - noise bothers me to a great
extent, I cannot stand it.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
time
the equivalent noise level in dB the number of personal cars
trucks over 35 tonnes vans under 3.5 tonnes
TEM Journal. Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 62-67, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06, February 2024.
TEM Journal – Volume 13 / Number 1 / 2024. 65
Each digit represents the subjective strength of the
respondent's attitude concerning all questions about
the noise burden issue.
The sample of respondents consisted of 50
inhabitants of Turzovka, of which 52% were women
and 48% were men. The return rate of the
questionnaire was 100%, and we preserved the
anonymity of the respondents. According to their
age, we divided the respondents into the following
age groups:
- age up to 26 years ‒ 30% of respondents,
- age from 26 to 62 years ‒ 50% of respondents,
and
- over 62 years ‒ 20% of respondents.
In terms of occupation, 26 (52%) were retired,
students and mothers on maternity leave, 4 residents
(8 %) were not working, 8 (16%) respondents were
doing mental work, and 12 (24%) were doing manual
work.
Among the questions asked, we also surveyed the
type of housing. 31 respondents (62%) reported
living in a house on the first floor, 19 respondents
(38%) lived in a flat, of which 9 (18%) reported
living on the 1st floor, 5 (10%) reported living on the
2nd floor, and 5 (10%) reported living on the 3rd
floor. These results also represent the composition of
houses and flats in Turzovka, where housing in
family houses dominates, especially in the urban
districts. One question in the questionnaire asked
about the orientation of bedrooms. As many as 48
(96%) respondents indicated that such rooms are
oriented in the street with heavy traffic.
The next question focused on the respondents'
views on where they felt the most noise disturbance.
They answered on a Likert scale from the following
options: at work, home, school and outdoors. We
present the results of the responses (respondents
could also indicate more than one option) in Table 4.
Table 4. Respondents' response to the question of the
location where they experience the effects of noise as
disturbing [26]
The environment where
respondents experience noise
disturbance
Respondents' answers in %
1
2
3
4
5
at work
10
16
10
0
4
at home
2
15
22
3
8
at school
0
0
2
3
10
outdoors
2
3
30
10
5
There is a significant impact of noise exposure on
residents in both the home and school environments,
but most so in the outdoor environment, with up to
45 respondents agreeing. In another response, 40
(80%) of respondents identified traffic as the most
significant source of noise, 5 (10%) of respondents
identified work-related noise, and 5 (10%) of
respondents identified noise from outdoor industrial
sources. These results are consistent with noise
measurements carried out on a busy road.
Subsequently, we aimed to specify the periods the
respondents perceived as significant concerning the
impact of noise burden on their organism. These
results, subjected to comparative analysis with
accurate measurements, result from subjective
perceptions with observed noise values. Figure 5
presents these results.
Figure 5. Time of day periods identified by respondents as
the most bothersome for environmental noise [26]
Up to 40 (80 %) of respondents said that noise
annoyed them between 5:00 and 10:00. The next
critical period of the day is between 18:00 and 20:00,
which was identified by up to 45 (90%) respondents
as the period during which they experience noise
disturbance. The results are compatible with the
obtained measurements. We measured the highest
traffic intensity and noise burden values in these time
intervals, namely from 5:00 to 6:00 - up to 74.3 dB,
when the equivalent noise level was exceeded until
7:00 when the average noise level reached 71.7 dB.
In the afternoon, we also recorded a noise burden as
high as 70.4 dB.
The final questions in the questionnaire were
devoted to the adverse effects of noise on public
health. The most common health problems
mentioned by the respondents were sleep
disturbance, mentioned by 18 (36%) of the
respondents, and hearing impairment by 15 (30 %) of
the respondents. We cannot overlook concentration
disorders in work performance reported by 9 (18%)
respondents, mainly young people under 26 years. Of
the sample of respondents who had health problems,
18 residents (i.e. up to 52% of the respondents) had
to seek medical attention. Nine respondents need to
take medication for sleep disorders in the long term.
According to the questionnaire results, residents
would welcome effective measures to reduce noise in
the town. Firstly, up to 33 (66%) of respondents
would welcome a reduced traffic volume in the town.
25 (50%) respondents favoured the construction of
noise barriers, and 22 (44%) respondents demanded a
reduction in the maximum speed limit.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
TEM Journal. Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 62-67, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06, February 2024.
66 TEM Journal – Volume 13 / Number 1 / 2024.
15 (30%) would welcome measures such as road
reconstruction, soundproof windows, and other
construction solutions.
5. Conclusion
The result analysis shows that the classification of
urban traffic noise depending on the frequency of
vehicles is annoying and disturbing for the
inhabitants of Turzovka. In the overall analysis of the
results, 25% of the measurements were higher than
60 dB(A), which shows that traffic noise is a
significant pollutant even in such a small non-
industrial city. The results showed a clear
relationship between urban traffic noise and traffic
volume.
The questionnaire results indicate that up to 34
(68%) of citizens feel the impact of noise exposure
on their health. In selecting the types of health
problems to include in the questionnaire, we drew on
information on the health problems of Europeans
obtained from the EEA European studies mentioned
in Chapter 1 and from the 2015 survey by the Slovak
Republic's Public Health Office [27]. Of our research
sample, up to 34 (52%) respondents also had to see a
doctor, and some are also taking medication for
noise-related problems such as sleep disturbances
and hearing impairment.
Acknowledgements
This article was published with support of Grant Agency
of the Ministry of Education of the SR VEGA - project no.
1/0213/23 and of Grant UGA UKF in Nitra – project - no.
V/5/2023.
References:
[1]. Öhrström, E. (1991). Psycho-social effects of traffic
noise exposure. Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 151(3), 513-517.
[2]. Griefahn, B., Schuemer-Kohrs, A., Schuemer, R.,
Moehler, U., & Mehnert, P. (2000). Physiological,
subjective, and behavioural responses during sleep to
noise from rail and road traffic. Noise and
health, 3(9), 59.
[3]. Petrescu, V., Ciudin, R., Isarie, C., Cioca, L. I., &
Nederita, V. (2015, November). Traffic Noise
Pollution in a Historical City Center–Case Study
Project within Environmental Engineering Field of
Study. In 3rd International Engineering and
Technology Education Conference.
[4]. Soares, F., Freitas, E., Cunha, C., Silva, C., Lamas, J.,
Mouta, S., & Santos, J. A. (2017). Traffic noise:
Annoyance assessment of real and virtual sounds
based on close proximity
measurements. Transportation Research Part D:
Transport and Environment, 52, 399-407.
[5]. Muzet, A. (2007). Environmental noise, sleep and
health. Sleep medicine reviews, 11(2), 135-142.
[6]. Skånberg, A., & Öhrström, E. (2002). Adverse health
effects in relation to urban residential
soundscapes. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 250(1),
151-155.
[7]. Sandberg, U., Ejsmont, J., (2002). Tyre-Road Noise
Reference Book. Informex SE-5904. Kisa: Sweden.
[8]. Gołebiewski, R., Makarewicz, R., Nowak, M., &
Preis, A. (2003). Traffic noise reduction due to the
porous road surface. Applied Acoustics, 64(5), 481-
494.
[9]. Griefahn, B., Gjestland, T., & Preis, A. (2008).
Annoyance of residents living in urban areas. Report
to partners Deliverable A.D6: M.36 SILENCE
Integrated. European Commission, Brussels.
[10]. Paunović, K., Jakovljević, B., & Belojević, G.
(2009). Predictors of noise annoyance in noisy and
quiet urban streets. Science of the total
environment, 407(12), 3707-3711.
[11]. Gille, L., & Marquis-Favre, C. (2015). Does the
order of different successive vehicle pass-bys have an
influence on the annoyance due to an urban road
traffic noise. EuroNoise, Maastricht, 31.
[12]. Morel, J., Marquis-Favre, C., & Gille, L. A. (2016).
Noise annoyance assessment of various urban road
vehicle pass-by noises in isolation and combined with
industrial noise: A laboratory study. Applied
Acoustics, 101, 47-57.
[13]. Babisch W, Wolke G, Heinrich J, Straff W (2014).
Road traffic noise and hypertension – accounting for
the location of rooms. Environ Res. 133, 380–7.
[14]. Babisch, W. (2014). Updated exposure-response
relationship between road traffic noise and coronary
heart diseases: a meta-analysis. Noise and
Health, 16(68), 1.
[15]. World Health Organization. (2011). Burden of
disease from environmental noise: Quantification of
healthy life years lost in Europe. World Health
Organization. Regional Office for Europe.
[16]. WHO (2014). Burden of disease from ambient air
pollution for 2012. Geneva: World Health
Organization. Retrieved from:
http://www.who.int/phe/health_topics/outdoorair/data
bases/AAP_BoD_results_March2014.pdf
[accessed 27 May 2023].
[17]. Dzhambov, A. M., Markevych, I., Tilov, B.,
Arabadzhiev, Z., Stoyanov, D., Gatseva, P., &
Dimitrova, D. D. (2018). Pathways linking residential
noise and air pollution to mental ill-health in young
adults. Environmental Research, 166, 458-465.
[18]. Shah, S. K., Tariq, Z., Lee, J., & Lee, Y. (2020).
Real-time machine learning for air quality and
environmental noise detection. In 2020 IEEE
International Conference on Big Data (Big Data),
3506-3515. IEEE.
[19]. Eminson, K., Cai, Y. S., Chen, Y., Blackmore, C.,
Rodgers, G., Jones, N., ... & Hansell, A. (2023). Does
air pollution confound associations between
environmental noise and cardiovascular outcomes?-A
systematic review. Environmental Research, 116075.
TEM Journal. Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 62-67, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM131-06, February 2024.
TEM Journal – Volume 13 / Number 1 / 2024. 67
[20]. Hänninen O, Knol AB, Jantunen M, Lim TA, Conrad
A, Rappolder M et al. (2014). Environmental burden
of disease in Europe: assessing nine risk factors in six
countries. Environ Health Perspectives, 122(5), 439–
46.
[21]. EUROFOUND. (2017). European Quality of Life
Survey 2016: Quality of life, quality of public
services, and quality of society. Publications Office of
the European Union, Luxembourg.
[22]. Cobzeanu, B., Butnaru, C., Lungu, A., Poenaru, M.,
Hainăroșie, R., & Rădulescu, T. (2019).
Environmental noise: health and policy-an up to date
minireview. Environmental Engineering &
Management Journal (EEMJ), 18(3).
[23]. KUZMOVÁ et. al. (2013). Vplyv hluku na psychiku
človeka a zvládanie stresu. [The effect of noise on a
person's psyche and stress management]. Psychiatria
‒ psychoterapia ‒ psychosomatika, 20(3), 31 ‒ 34.
Retrieved from:
http://www.psychiatria-casopis.sk/files/psychiatria/2-
2013/ppp2-2013-cla5.pdf
[accessed: 15 July 2023].
[24]. EEA. (2021). Znečistenie hlukom je v Európe stále
rozšírené, ale existujú spôsoby na zníženie jeho
úrovne [Noise pollution is still widespread in Europe,
but there are ways to reduce its level]. Retrieved
from: https://www.eea.europa.eu/sk/signaly-eea/
signaly-2020/articles/znecistenie-hlukom-je-v-europe
[accessed: 15 July 2023].
[25]. Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic. (2007).
Decree of the Ministry of Health of the Slovak
Republic no. 549/2007 Z. z., which lays down details
on the permissible values of noise, infrasound and
vibrations and on the requirements for the
objectification of noise, infrasound and vibrations in
the environment. Ministry of Health of the Slovak
Republic: Bratislava, Slovakia.
[26]. Hyneková, H. (2022). The impact of environmental
noise on the living and working conditions of the
population. [Bachelor thesis]. Nitra: PF UKF, 65.
[27]. RÚVZ. (2021). Hluk v životnom prostredí a jeho
vplyv na zdravie ľudí – DOTAZNÍK. RUVZ.
Retrieved from:
https://www.uvzsr.sk/docs/info/zp/Vyhodnotenie_Dot
aznika_hluk.pdf [accessed: 21 July 2023].
