IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0258102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relative effects of self-reported noise and odour annoyance on psychological distress: Different effects across sociodemographic groups?

Author

Listed:
  • Eline Berkers
  • Ioana Pop
  • Mariëlle Cloïn
  • Antje Eugster
  • Hans van Oers

Abstract

In earlier research, both higher levels of noise and odour annoyance have been associated with decreased mental health. Presumably, these perceptions can trigger feelings of threat and stress reactions and in turn evoke psychological distress. There are two important lacunas in the research on this topic: most studies only consider either noise or odour annoyance and not their relative effect on psychological distress and there is scarce evidence about whether different sociodemographic groups experience more psychological distress due to noise and odour annoyance. Starting from the diversity in the available coping resources and in their daily life patterns, we distinguish gender, age and educational level as relevant sociodemographic variables. Using data from the Health Monitor (n = 25236) in Noord-Brabant, we found using Ordinary Least Squares Regression that individuals that reported higher levels of noise and odour annoyance reported higher levels of psychological distress. Furthermore, the effect of noise annoyance was relatively stronger compared to that of odour annoyance. Regarding the interaction effects, we found that younger adults’ psychological distress was more strongly affected by noise annoyance compared to older adults, but not by odour annoyance. The psychological distress of individuals with no or primary education was more strongly affected by both noise and odour annoyance compared those with tertiary education, but not when compared to those who completed lower or higher secondary education. Contrary to our expectations, we did not find different effects between men and women. Though the evidence for the interactions was mixed, classic health inequalities along age and education lines are reinforced when considering the relationship between noise and odour annoyance and psychological distress.

Suggested Citation

  • Eline Berkers & Ioana Pop & Mariëlle Cloïn & Antje Eugster & Hans van Oers, 2021. "The relative effects of self-reported noise and odour annoyance on psychological distress: Different effects across sociodemographic groups?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-20, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0258102
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0258102
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0258102&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0258102?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Mitchell & Mercede Erfanian & Christopher Soelistyo & Tin Oberman & Jian Kang & Robert Aldridge & Jing-Hao Xue & Francesco Aletta, 2022. "Effects of Soundscape Complexity on Urban Noise Annoyance Ratings: A Large-Scale Online Listening Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Rehana Shrestha & Klaus Telkmann & Benjamin Schüz & Pramesh Koju & Reshma Shrestha & Biraj Karmacharya & Gabriele Bolte, 2022. "Measuring Environmental Justice in Real Time: A Pilot Study Using Digital Participatory Method in the Global South, Nepal," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-21, April.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0258102. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.