Noise Exposure Estimates of Urban MP3 Player Users

7/18/2019 Noise Exposure Estimates of Urban MP3 Player Users

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/noise-exposure-estimates-of-urban-mp3-player-users 1/30

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

To examine the sound level and duration of use of personal listening devices (PLDs) by 18

college students! ages 18"#$ years! as they entered a %e& 'or ity college campus! to

determine &hether noise exposure from PLDs &as in excess ofrecommended exposure limits and &hat factors might influence exposure* +ree"field

e,uivalent sound levels from PLD headphones &ere measured on a manne,uin &ith a

calibrated soundlevel meter* Participants reported demographic information! &hether they

had -ust come off the sub&ay! the type of PLD and earphones used! and duration per day

and days per &ee they used their PLDs* .ased on measured free"field e,uivalent

sound levels from PLD headphones and the reported PLD use! per day #8*/0 of participants

exceeded 8# d. A"&eighted 8"hr e,uivalent sound levels (Lsub Ae,)! and per &ee

#1*0 exceeded 8# d. A"&eighted 23"hr e,uivalent continuous sound levels (Lsub

A&n)* The ma-ority of PLD users exceeded recommended sound exposure limits!

suggesting that they &ere at increased ris for noise"induced hearing loss* Analyses of the

demographics of these participants and mode of transportation to campus failed to indicate

any particular gender differences in PLD use or in mode of transportation influencing

sound exposure*

Full Text• Translate+ull text

• Turn on search term navigation

Headnote

Purpose4 To examine the sound level and duration of use of personal listening devices

(PLDs) by 18 college students! ages 18"#$ years! as they entered a %e& 'or ity college

campus! to determine &hether noise exposure from PLDs &as in excess of

recommended exposure limits and &hat factors might influenceexposure*

5ethod4 +ree"field e,uivalent sound levels from PLD headphones &ere measured on a

manne,uin &ith a calibrated sound level meter* Participants reported demographic

information! &hether they had -ust come off the sub&ay! the type of PLD and earphones

used! and duration per day and days per &ee they used their PLDs*

6esults4 .ased on measured free"field e,uivalent sound levels from PLD headphones and

the reported PLDuse! per day #8*/0 of participants exceeded 8# d. A"&eighted 8"hr

e,uivalent sound levels (Lsub Ae,)! and per &ee #1*0 exceeded 8# d. A"&eighted

23"hr e,uivalent continuous sound levels (Lsub A&n)*

http://search.proquest.com/docview/858019991/1421E16919D6655BA9/1?accountid=49910#center


http://search.proquest.com/docview/858019991/1421E16919D6655BA9/1?accountid=49910


http://search.proquest.com/docview/858019991/1421E16919D6655BA9/1?accountid=49910




onclusions4 The ma-ority of PLD users exceeded recommended sound exposure limits!

suggesting that they &ere at increased ris for noise"induced hearing loss* Analyses of the

demographics of these participants and mode of transportation to campus failed to indicate

any particular gender differences in PLD use or in mode of transportation influencing

sound exposure*

7' 9:6D;4 noise"induced hearing loss! personal listening devices! portable music players!

minimal hearing impairment! social factors

(Pro<uest4 *** denotes formulae omitted*)

=n the present study! &e examined the sound levels of personal listening devices (PLDs>

e*g*! Ds! iPods! and 5P$ players)! also referred to as portable music players! used by

college students in %e& 'or ity* The goal &as to determine &hether the students?

estimated noise exposure from PLD use alone &as more or less than the

recommended exposure level for occupational noise (%ational =nstitute for :perational

;afety and @ealth %=:;@B! 18)* :ne potentially significant cause of noise"induced

hearing loss (%=@L) is attributed to recreational noise (Peng! Tao! C @uang! /33>9eichbold

C Eoro&a! /33)! such as the use of PLDs* PLD users may be at ris for %=@L if

they use these devices at high volumes for lengthy periods of time (+ligor! /33F)* 6esearch

sho&s that %=@L is the most common form of ac,uired hearing loss! secondary only to the

hearing loss related to age (6abino&itG! /333> 6oyster! 1F)*

%=@L results primarily from long"term exposure to sounds that are excessively high

(%ational =nstitute on Deafness and :ther ommunication Disorders! /33F)* The data sets

used to determine the degree of hearing loss caused by noise &ere collected in the late

1F3s and early 13s in predominantly 9hite! adult male populations that &ere exposed

to industrial noise (.aughn! 1$> .urns C 6obinson! 13> Lempert C @enderson! 1$>

Passchier"Hermeer! 1F8)* These data &ere instrumental in developing standards

(=nternational :rganisation for ;tandardisation! 13> American %ational ;tandards

=nstitute A%;=B! 1F) to describe the relationship bet&een noise exposure andnoiseinduced permanent threshold shift (%=PT;)! as &ell as I*;* federal regulations

(:ccupational ;afety and@ealth Administration :;@AB! 18$) and safety recommendations

(%=:;@! 18)*urrent understanding of these data is that a maximum exposure of 8# d.!

A"&eighted (d.A)! for an 8"hr daily exposure over a &oring lifetime of 23 years results in

roughly 80 of exposed persons having a hearinghandicap (Prince! ;tayner! ;mith!CJilbert!



1)! o&ing to the &ide variability seen in susceptibility to %=@L across individuals*

xtrapolation of estimates of %=PT; to other populations (e*g*! children and adolescents)

exposed to nonindustrial sound exposures (e*g*! music) is therefore tenuous* 9ith these

limitations acno&ledged! it is &ell understood that higher sound levelsdamage hearing in

shorter periods of time than do lo&er sound levels* To e,uate%=@L ris! time"intensity

trading ratios are used (%=:;@! 18) for sound exposures above a maximum

KsafeK level no&n to not contribute to %=@L (5elni! 11)*

Literature 6evie&

Damage to the hearing mechanism from noise exposure is permanent and cumulative

through one?s lifetime* %=@L from long"term sound exposure usually develops insidiously!

and so significant hearing loss exists before the individual becomes a&are of his or her

communication difficulty secondary to cochlear damage* The contribution of PLD use to %=@L

remains a topic of debate* vidence exists to support the need to consider recreational %=@L

a public health concern* Torre (/338) estimated that over 30 of college students o&n a

PLD* =t is estimated that bet&een #0 and 130 of PLD users regularly listen to music

at levels and for durations that put themselves at ris for %=@L (lar! 1/> +elchlin!

@ohmann!C 5atefi! 18)* 6esearchers have estimated that as many as 1/*#0 of

individuals aged F to 1 years have an audiometric configuration indicating they have noise"

induced threshold shifts in one or both ears (%isar et al*! /331)*

6esearch indicates that exposure to loud sounds over a long period of time may lead to

difficulty understanding speech (%ational =nstitute on Deafness and:ther ommunication

Disorders! /33)* onse,uently! even a mild hearing loss may lead to an uncertain grasp of

many of the grammatical aspects of spoen language (i*e*! &ea consonants! such as

fricatives and stops> morphemes)* %=@L renders sounds distorted or muffled &hile also

causing tinnitus! a ringing or buGGing in the head or ear in the absence of an external

stimulus (Daniel! /33> 6oyster! 1F)* :ther auditory in-uries from noise exposure include

loudness tolerance problems (e*g*! hyperacusis) and pitch perception problems (e*g*!

diplacusis> 6oyster! 1F)* hildren and teens&ho have been exposed to even a single

intense sound (sufficient to cause acoustic trauma) may experience both hearing loss and

tinnitus! &ith symptoms existing for at least a year or more (@olgers C Pettersson! /33#)*

;everal recent studies have reported the capacity for PLD output levels to present a ris for

%=@L (+ligor C ox! /332> 7eith! 5ichaud! C hiu! /338> Portnuff C +ligor! /33F>9*9illiams!



/33#)* That PLDs are capable of causing %=@L is not a matter of debate* 9hether PLDs are

used often enough! at high enough levels! to pose a ris to a large number of users"a ris

sufficient to &arrant the attention of the popular media"is a matter of debate (+ligor! /33)*

6esearchers have reported a&ide range of estimates for individuals at ris of

%=@L fromPLD use* 6ice! 6ossi! and :lina (18) estimated that only 1 in 1!#33 PLDusers is

at ris for a hearing disabilityfrom using PLDs* +elchlin et al* (18) reported that! of $#3

cassette tape player users! 130 exceeded an 8"hr time"&eighted average of 8# d.A*

Areasonable goal of hearing loss preventionists might be to identify subpopulations &ith

greater concentrations of individuals at ris because of factors that predispose them to

listen to music at louder levelsthan normal* +actors that are thought to contribute to chosen

(or KpreferredK) listening levels are the level of ambient noise in the listening environment

(Airo! Pearinen! C :linuora! 1F> +ligor C =ves! /33F> Portnuff! +ligor! C Arehart! /33>

9orthington et al*! /33) and earphone type (+ligor C =ves! /33F> @odgetts! 6ieger! C

;Garo! /33)* Age! gender! and other sociological and demographic characteristics may

also contribute to sound exposure from PLDs*

Teenagers fre,uently play their music at a higher intensity than do other PLD users &hile

not realiGing thelevel as potentially haGardous (Portnuff et al*! /33)* A survey

commissioned by the American ;peech"Language" @earing Association (Eogby! /33F)

examined the reported hearing difficulties of $31 high school students and 1!333 adults in

the Inited ;tates and found that teens &ere more liely than adults to report three of thefollo&ing symptoms of hearing loss4 (a) increasing the volume on their television or radio

(/80 of students vs* /F0 of adults)! (b) saying K9hatK or K@uhK during normal

conversation (/0of students vs* /10 of adults)! and (c) experiencing tinnitus or ringing in

the ears (10of students vs* 1/0 of adults)* Portnuff et al* (/33) also found that! on

average! teenage males 1$ to 1 years of age &ere choosing higher listeninglevels on PLDs

than &ere their female peers* ;uch gender differences have been observed in other studies

of PLD use (+ligor C =ves! /33F> Torre! /338> 9* 9illiams! /33#)! suggesting that gender

differences may exist*

Airo et al* (1F) reported that &hen ambient noise in the listening environment&as

increased to /d.A! the average chosen listening level of PLD users increased froman

average of Fd.Ain ,uiet to 8#d.A*9*9illiams (/33#) surveyed the listening levels of ##

adults on a noisy city street (&here ambient levels &ere $ d.A) and found that the average

chosen listening level &as 8Fd.A*These t&o studies independently sho& PLD users choosing



a signal"to"noise ratio of 1$ d.A* +urthermore! 9illiams estimated that /20 of his

participants exceeded 8# d.A for an A"&eighted 8"hr e,uivalent continuous

sound level (LA8hn) based on measures of PLD output at use levels on a calibrated

manne,uin and participant self"reported use duration* onversely!9orthington et al* (/33)

ased $3 participants to set PLDs to their preferred listening level in ,uiet and in 81 d. ;PL

of recorded sub&ay noise and found that none of their participants exceeded

recommended exposure levels* =n ,uiet! the average A"&eighted e,uivalent

sound level (Lsub Ae,) &as / d.A! and in noise! the average Lsub Ae, &as 8*#

d.A* stimated &eely sound exposure from PLDs &as determined by self"reported daily

duration of use (5M 1* hrNday) and days per &ee of use (5M 2 daysN&ee)*The

participants in9orthington et al*?s study had estimated &eely exposures of F*8 hr! and

conse,uently! none of them &ere considered to be at ris for %=@L in either ,uiet or

sub&ay noise because no participant exceeded a &eely e,uivalent continuous exposure of8# d.A*

=t is note&orthy that9orthington et al* (/33) sho&ed an average Lsub Ae,

in noise exceeding 8# d.A! and so perhaps a larger sample of participants &ho

may use PLDs in noisy environments for longer durations might sho& a higher concentration

of individuals at ris for %=@L* 9ith one of the largest public transit systems in the &orld!

riders of the %e& 'or ity sub&ay system mae up a reasonable target for study* Jershon!

%eitGel! .arrera! and Aram (/33F) reported that noise levels on sub&ay platforms &ere an

average of 8#* d.A! &ith levels in sub&ay cars ranging from 82 to 11/ d.A* .ased on very

conservative damage"ris criteria to assess any ris for hearing loss! Jershon et al*

suggested that riders are at slight ris for %=@L from exposure to sub&ay noise alone* This

does not account for additional sound exposure from occupational and

nonoccupational exposures! such as use of PLDs during and after one?s commute* The

reasons for a person touse a PLD in urban settings may include the capacity to do so! given

the portability of large music libraries as &ell as sociological factors that

motivate use despite the potential for %=@L ris*

Although personal music players have been around since the 183s! the popularity of the

Apple iPod has dramatically increased PLD use! particularly among young people* =ts

popularity is partly due to its function and design* +or example! the iPod is smaller and more

portable than previous PLDs* The iPod user is able to easily do&nload music by connecting

to the personal computer through iTunes and peer"to"peer net&ors! and the large storage

capacity of the iPod means that people can listen to it longer than &ith earlier technology* =n



addition! the compressed audio (e*g*! 5P$) file format allo&s music to move across space

&ithout being significantly degraded and to be reproduced &ithout overtly losing sound

,uality (.oradar! /33F)* The large number of songs and the compressed format mean that

music can be listened to for a greater duration of time than &ith previous storage media

(e*g*! Ds or cassette tapes)* These physical ,ualities create an opportunity for users to be

at greater ris for %=@L*

The ;ocial +actors Associated 9ith Personal Listening Devices

The social and cultural aspects of the iPod may play a greater role in the use of these

devices than the physical features described earlier* ultural theorists interpreted the first

self"contained PLD! a portable cassette tape player called the ;ony9alman! as a cultural

artifact embodying the values most associated &ith latemodern! postindustrial

societies4mobility! high technology! modernism! choice! youth! and entertainment (Du Jay!

@all! Oones! 5acay! C %egus! 1)* This idea of Kprivate listening in public placesK

represented a ne& and distinctive &ay of life4 The 9alman user becomes the solitary figure

in the cro&d! using music to screen out the boring and routine aspects of daily life* This

device allo&ed the user to become a Kself"sufficient individual &andering alone through the

city landscape!K an Kurban nomadK (Du Jay et al*! 1! p* 1F)* The Apple iPod extended

and perfected these themes* onsumers no& face an unprecedented level of choice and

personaliGation! &ith access to thousands of songs and individually customiGed playlists*

9ith the advent of compressed music files and audio file sharing and do&nloading! &hich&ere not available &ith the cassette tape or even theD!music is finally truly and infinitely

repeatable and reproducible*

PLDusers can escape fromthe uncontrollable sounds of the city! avoiding car alarms!

sub&ay noise! car horns! and being ased for money or directions* The PLD is particularly

appealing to people in modern affluent cultures! &here there is a high premium

on personal space! leading to a desire to &ithdra& and escape the streets (.auman! 1$>

.lesserC;alter! /338> .ull! /33> Putnam! /333> ;ennett! 13> ;immel! 1)* Lie the

automobile! the PLDcan create solitude for the urban commuter! even &hile in close

proximity to others* The &hite headphones of the iPod send the message that the &earer is

not to be bothered (.ull! /33)* People today also &ant to mae public spaces conform to

their desires (.oradar! /33F> .ull! /33> 6* 9illiams! 18$)* PLD users desire to redefine

their daily schedule and create a private soundtrac to accompany their commute or gym



&orout* They filter out the public soundscape and create their o&n controlled private

soundscape (;Geliga! /33)*

.lesser and ;alter (/338) argued that! in addition to the social need to control and

individualiGe personalspace! the iPod can lead to an altered state of consciousness* Although

the extant research is indirect! they suggested that music stimulates the brain and changes

the listener?s emotional state! causing relaxation or excitation (.lesser C ;alter! /338>

Levitin! /33F)* .y means of energetic masing! loud music maes the listener functionally

unable to hear anything but the music at hand! thus transporting that listener to another

aural space! from the immediate physical &orld to an imagined &orld of themusician

(.lesserC;alter! /338)*PLDusers report feeling calmer during their commute and

experiencing more pleasure during even mundane &or (.ull! /33> ;imun! /33)*

Dra&ing from the cultural theories of Adorno (11)! .en-amin (1$)! @eidegger (1F/)!

5arcuse (1F2)! and 5cLuhan (1F)! .ull (/33) argued that the privacy and

personaliGation of the iPod create a sense of &armth and connection in the distant and

exclusive spaces of modern urban culture* As a result! many users no& describe the iPod as

almost a necessity of life* =t has been called an Kurban ;herpaK or Kdigital ;herpa!K meaning

that people rely on their iPods to navigate today?s urban &orldmuch as mountain climbers in

the @imalayas rely on their guides (.ull! /33)*

5odern urban life can be particularly alienating for young people! &ho are struggling for

identity and individuality* 5usic has played a primary role in this search for meaning!identity! and leisure for young people (7otarba! 12)* The iPod?s slee and uni,ue design!

accompanied by its stylish mareting campaign! appeals to young people* The unmistaable

&hite headphones of the iPod signal the possession of a hip! stylish cultural product* The

iPod provides membership in a private club &hose membership is in the millions (Oones!

/33#)* According to the ;tudent 5onitor! a maret research group! college students rated

listening to their iPods as the coolest free time activity (Associated Press! /33F)* =t has been

called a KperfectK device and rans number one among today?s KcoolK items (Levy! /33F)*

The iPod has become a symbol of a generation and a marer of social status*

+urthermore! and potentially to their detriment! loud music is a favorite pastime of young

people* =t can be reasonably assumed that young people are attracted! more so than older

individuals are! to venues and activities that involve loud music! such as roc concerts!

clubs! and no& PLDs* ;ince the inception of roc ?n? roll (and perhaps before)! loud music

&as a sign of youth! rebellion! and individuality* =t figures into young people?s identities as



cool! rebellious! and different from those of older people* onsider that it is usually parents

&ho as their teenagers to turn do&n the music! rarely the other &ay around* +urthermore!

feelings of alienation among urban youth as &ell as high energy and limited avenues for

self"expression can lead teenagers and young adults to see out altered states of

consciousness or heightened physical experiences* The physical effects! including the

stimulation of brain centers and a rapid heartbeat! are intensified &hen one?s music is being

played at a high volume (Jo&ensmith C .loom! 1> @uron! /33F)* +inally! the

anonymous nature of modern life results in the desire to broadcast one?s identity (Joffman!

1#> ;immel! 1)! so it is possible that PLD users purposely play their music loud

enough so others can hear it* =n the anonymous environment of a large city! &hich

decreases social controls! iPod listeners &ho play their music at full volume are broadcasting

their tastes and personalities and! in a &ay! connecting to other people in other&ise

anonymous and isolating urban settings*

The Present ;tudy

The goal of the current study &as to determine &hether PLD users at a %e& 'or ity

college! particularly those &ho generally use sub&ays to travel to school! use their PLDs at

high enough levels and for durations long enough to place them at ris for %=@L* 9e tested

the follo&ing hypotheses4

@ypothesis 14 ;ome PLD users &ill listen at high levels and report durations of use that

place them at ris for %=@L*

@ypothesis /4 PLD users &ho travel via the sub&ay &ill listen at higher levels than &ill those

&ho do not travel via the sub&ay*

@ypothesis $4 5ale PLD users &ill choose higher levels than &ill females*

5ethod

Participants

ollege students &ho used PLDs and &aled onto the ity Iniversity of %e& 'or campus!

ad-acent to an exitfrom a sub&ay station! &ere invited to participate in this study*

Participants consisted of 18 college students (/ males! females) averaging //*/ years

of age (5dn M /3! range4 18"#$)* Participants &ere invited to have their



earphone levels measured and &ere ased to fill out a ,uestionnaire re,uesting

demographic information (i*e*! date of birth! age! and gender)! &hether they had -ust exited

the sub&ay! &hether the volume control of their PLD &as the same since they had left the

sub&ay! the type of PLD and earphones they used! and the duration and fre,uency of use of

their PLD (see the Appendix for a copy of the ,uestionnaire)* ;elf"reported listening duration

(total listening time per day and days per &ee) &as considered an appropriate variable for

estimating daily and &eely exposures because this has been used in previously published

studies (e*g*! Airo et al*! 1F> 9*9illiams! /33#>9orthington et al*! /33)*Although

the use of a self"report introduces some error in the measure! there is evidence that self"

report of use of ear"level devices does closely match actual behavior in some circumstances

(Jriffin! %eitGel! Daniell! C ;eixas! /33)*

Participants &ere eligible for the study if they &ere adults (age 18 and older) and provided

informed consent* %o efforts &ere taen to determine &hether participants had normal

hearing because in this investigation! &e sought to study a large cross"section of the urban

population! some of &hom may have hearing loss* Although it is possible that some

participants in this study had hearing loss (conductive or sensorineural)! the influence of

hearing loss on chosen listening level to PLD is not &ell defined* Loss of hearing sensitivity

may cause some individuals &ith hearing loss to choose higher listening levels! &hereas

loudness recruitment may cause others &ith hearing loss to choose lo&er listening levels*

.ecause &e had no expectation that a higher rate of hearing loss &ould be present in this

study population compared &ith other urban users of PLD! no effort to screen for normal

hearing &as deemed appropriate for the purpose of this study*

Procedure and 5easures

9e measured sound levels from each participant?s PLD using a manne,uin built according to

The Oolene ooboo (5artin C 5artin! /33)! &hich is designed to be visually attractive

and capable of assessing free"field e,uivalent sound levels from earphones*9e constructed

Oolene using a fashion manne,uin and a 6adio ;hac sound level meter (5odel $$"/3##)

modified &ith the microphone seated in the canal portion of a silicon model of an ear* This

sound level meter has a digital display> a range from #3 to 1/F d.! A and &eighting> fast

(time constant M 1/# ms) and slo& (time constant M 1 s) integration of the sound level>

and! according to product literature! an accuracy of / d. at 112 d. ;PL and a fre,uency

response of $/ to 13333 @G* Although this sound level meter has limited accuracy relative to



a laboratory",uality measurement system (e*g*! a Type = sound level meter)! its

performance &as considered acceptable for the purpose of this study*

9e calibrated the manne,uin using the 5icrophone =n 6eal ar techni,ue (=nternational

:rganisation for ;tandardisation! /33/) to determine a coupler to freefield correction factor

to report free"field e,uivalent levels(transfer function of the outer ear T+:B of the

manne,uin)* A hole &as pierced &ith a needle in the side of the canal of the silicon ear! and

a metal grommet &ith an inner diameter of 1*#mm&as inserted into this piercing* A probe

tube (outer diameter4 1*# mm) &as positioned /mmin front of the microphone that &as

seated in the silicone model ear and connected to the sound level meter* This probe tube

&as connected to an 6"c Probe 5icrophone ;ystem (tymotic 6esearch! =nc*) and routed

to a personal computer running data ac,uisition soft&are (Adobe Audition! version 1*#)*

Pin noise generated in Adobe Audition &as presented via loudspeaer at 3 d.A (verified

via a separate 6adio ;hac sound level meter held by the manne,uin?s ear) and measured

via 6"c in the free field and again via the probe microphone in the ear canal of the

manne,uin* The difference in fre,uency response bet&een the free field and the ear canal

probe microphone measures &as considered the T+: for this manne,uin* This T+:

correction &as saved as a filter in the Audition soft&are* This T+: filter &as applied to

recorded sound files of music that &ere presented via t&o different earphones placed on the

model ear*

The t&o earphones used for calibration &ere the Apple iPod earbud earphone included &iththe purchase of an iPod and the 7oss 7;11 over"the"ear headphone (7oss orporation)*

=n"the"canal earphones (earphones that are seated deeply in the ear canal) did not fit the

manne,uin?s silicone ear because the length of the silicone ear?s canal &as too shallo& to

accommodate their full insertion* Thus! determining a free"field e,uivalent correction factor

for in"the"canal earphones for this manne,uin &as not possible*9e used five songs as the

stimuli for comparing T+:"corrected levels recorded via the 6"c probe microphone &ith

those levelsmeasured by the manne,uin"modified sound level meter* These songs &ere the

%o* 1 do&nloaded songs on iTunes*com on December $3! /338! in the genres of

Kalternative!K Kpop!K Kcountry!K Khip"hopNrap!K and Kroc*K A single number considered the

typical level of the chorus of the song observed on the sound level meter (set to Kslo&K

integration and A"&eighting) &as reported! rounded to the nearest decibel* Ising the

earbud earphone! the difference bet&een the overall A"&eighted levels measured by the

manne,uin?s sound levelmeter and the overallA"&eighted T+:"corrected 6"c probe

microphone measured levels &as 2*2 to F*3 d. (5 M #*3 d.! ;D M 3*#)* Ising the over"the"



ear headphones! the difference bet&een the overall A"&eightedlevels measured by the

manne,uin?s sound level meter and the overall A"&eighted T+:corrected 6"c probe

microphone measured levels &as $* to F*8 d. (5 M #*# d.! ;D M 1*1)* A single"number

correction factor of # d. &as considered appropriate for this field study (i*e*!

the level observed on the 6adio ;hac sound levelmeter had # d. subtracted from it to be

considered an approximation of the free"field e,uivalent A"&eighted sound pressure level)*

This #"d. correction factor! &ith exclusion of in"the"canal earphones! for use &ith the Oolene

manne,uin has been advocated by other researchers (.erger C ;tergar! /33)* The possible

measurement range! then! for free"field corrected earphone output &ith our manne,uin &as

2# to 1/1 d.A*

The levels measured from participants? earphones &ere assumed to be representative of

their typical listeninglevels* onse,uently! &e estimated noise exposure by day and by &ee

on the basis of the PLD user?s reported duration of use per day and days per &ee of use*

After the PLD level measurements &ere taen! participants &ere counseled regarding their

relative ris for %=@L and ho& they could tae steps to mitigate ris if necessary*

Data 5easures

Ambient noise in the vicinity of testing* The location &here data &ere collected &as on a

side&al -ust inside the entrance to the campus! ad-acent to the entrance of a sub&ay

station* ;ound levels in the testing locale &ere assessed using a ;oundPro ;P ;"/"1N$ Type

/ sound level meter (<uest Technologies)* Ambient streetnoise ranged from#F*3 to F8*1

d.A (5M F3*F d.A! ;DM $*1 d.! 5dn M F3*3 d.A)* The ambient street noise level&as never

e,ual to or above the level measured from the earphones of a participant* A re,uest &as

made of the %e& 'or ity Transit Authority to conduct this study inside the sub&ay station!

but this re,uest &as denied*

stimations of sound exposure* :f the /3/ participants&ho gave informed consent!

sevenmale participants and six female participants used in"the"canal earphones! the output

of &hich could not be accurately measured &ith our manne,uin* 9e thus excluded thesound level measures of these 1$ participants from the estimations of sound exposure*

arbuds&ere used by 18$ participants! and over"the"ear headphones &ere used by six

participants* %o participant?s free"field corrected earphone output &as less than the 2# d.A

measurement floor of our manne,uin* :ne male participant and one female participant had

free"field corrected earphone output of 1/1 d.A (the measurement ceiling of our



manne,uin)* +or the sae of estimatingexposure! &e used this level of 1/1 d.A for these

t&o participants? free"field corrected earphone listeninglevel*

9e made estimates of 8"hr e,uivalent continuous sound levels (LA8hn) per day on the basis

of the levelmeasured from the participant?s earphones and reported daily listening duration4

***(1)

&here L6 is the free"field corrected earphone listening level and T6 is the reported daily

listening duration in hours*

9e made estimates of 23"hr e,uivalent continuous sound levels (Lsub A&n) on the

basis of the same measured earphone level (L6) and reported daily listening duration (T6)!

multiplied by number of days per &ee of use (maing the assumption that the duration ofeach day?s use is the same)4

***(/)

&here Days& is the reported days per &ee of PLD use*

The estimated daily noise dose &as determined according to the follo&ing formula4

***($)

and the estimated &eely noise dose &as determined according to

***(2)

&here Dday is the daily noise dose (in percentage form) and D& is the &eely noise dose

(in percentage form) based onLA8hn andLsub A&n of 8# d.Aconstituting themaximum

(1330) allo&able daily and &eelynoise dose! respectively> this is

therecommended exposure limit adopted by %=:;@ (18)* xceeding 8# d.A for LA8hn

andNor Lsub A&n &ould reflect an increased ris for %=@L! as &ould exceeding 1330 for

Dday andNor D&*

6esults



The results sho&ed that #8*/0 of PLD users exceeded daily sound exposure limits! and

#1*0 of PLD users exceeded &eely sound exposure limits* Thus! a ma-ority of participants

in this study &ere at increased ris for %=@L* 5ean scores are presented in Table 1*

@ypothesis 14 ;ome PLD Isers 9ill Listen at @igh Levels and 6eport Durations of Ise That

Place Them at 6is for %=@L

The average free"field corrected listening level &as /*F d.A (;D M 13* d.)! &ith a

reported average 18*2 hr of use per &ee (;D M 1*1)* There &as no significant correlation

bet&een listening level and reported duration of PLD use (Pearson r M *3! p M *$F)* The

estimated LA8hn and Lsub A&n are represented in box"and"&hiser plots in +igures 1

and /! respectively* As expected from the &ay these estimates &ere made! the mean and

median of both LA8hn and Lsub A&n are similar (5s for LA8hn and Lsub A&n &ere

8*/ d.A and 8*2 d.A! respectively)* These results indicate that the average participant in

this study exceeds the %=:;@"recommended exposure limit! for both the daily and

&eely exposures* +igure $ is a histogram of estimated Lsub A&n> the data are

relatively normally distributed! &ith an ;D of 11* d.* The average dailynoise dose &as

$!/80! although this value is highly se&ed by those participants &ith the

highest noisedose> the median noise dose &as 1#0*

There has previously been a supposition that persons &ho use over"the"ear headphones

listen at levelslo&er than those &ho use earbud earphones (@odgetts et al*! /33)* =n the

present study! the estimated LA8hn &as 8*$ d.A for earbud users (;D M 11*# d.)! and the

estimated LA8hn for over"the"ear headphone users &as 8#*/ d.A (;DM 11*8 d.)*9ith 18$

earbud users and only six over"the"ear headphone users! &e &ere not able to conduct

statistical analyses to compare means*

@ypothesis /4 PLD Isers 9ho Travel Hia the ;ub&ay 9ill Listen at @igher Levels Than 9ill

Those 9ho Do %ot Travel Hia the ;ub&ay

As summariGed in Table /! a t&o"&ay independentsamples t test indicated there &as nosignificant difference at a Q *3# bet&een measured earphone output for the PLD users &ho

traveled by sub&ay ($*1 d.A! ;D M 13*1) versus those &ho did not travel by sub&ay

(i*e*! traveled by foot! bus! or car> /*$ d.A! ;D M 13*F8)* Although at least /3 out of the

2 sub&ay rider PLD users (210) had ad-usted the level of their devices after leaving the

sub&ay! according to a t&o"&ay independentsamples t test (p M *1#)! there &as no

significant difference bet&een the earphone output of those &ho did ad-ust the volume



control (average free"field corrected levels M 1*# d.A! ;D M *F) on their PLD compared

&ith the earphone output of those &ho did not (average free"field corrected levels M 2*#

d.A! ;D M 11*F)*

@ypothesis $4 5ale PLD Isers 9ill hoose @igher Levels Than 9ill +emales

The average free"field corrected earphone output &as /* d.A (;D M 13*$ d.) for males

and /*$ d.A (;D M 11*1 d.) for females! &ith no significant difference bet&een these

means (see Table $)* The LA8hn and Lsub A&n of male and female participants are

reported in +igures 2 and #! respectively* The average LA8hn of female participants &as

8F*8 d.A! and the average male LA8hn &as 8*F d.A* The average Lsub A&n of female

participants &as 8F*8 d.A! and the average male Lsub A&n &as 88*3 d.A* A t&o"&ay

independent"samples t test failed to sho& a difference bet&eenmale and femaleLA8hn (p

M *F/) andmale and female Lsub A&n (p M *28)*

Discussion

These data indicate that the average free"field corrected PLD user?s chosen

listening level &as in excess of the generally considered rule of thumb of not exceeding 8#

d.A* 6is for %=@L is not as simple as chosen listeninglevel! ho&ever! because it is the

normaliGed e,uivalent continuous sound level (i*e*! the level integrated over time)! based on

time"intensity trading ratios! that e,uates%=@L ris* =t has been previous reported (+elchlin

et al*! 18) that chosen listening level and duration of use are not associated> the

data from our study are consistent &ith this previous report* Therefore! it is only those PLD

users &ho choose levels in excess of a safe listening level and use PLDs longer than is safe

for their chosen listening level &ho are at ris for %=@L* The population that falls into this

category represents the demographic group at ris for %=@L and commands the relative

attention given by public health advocates* The siGe of this at"ris population has been a

topic of debate (+ligor! /33)* 5ore than half the participants in the present study &ere at

ris for %=@L*9e chose this study population because they are college students &ho have

been previously reported to be common users of PLDs (Danhauer et al*! /33> Torre! /338)!because the ambient noise in the listeners? environment is high in %e& 'or ity (Jershon

et al*! /33F)! and because bacground noise has been sho&n to increase PLD chosen

listening level (Airo et al*! 1F> +ligor C =ves! /33F)*

The average e,uivalent continuous level of participants in this study in a given day &as 8*/

d.A and in a given &ee &as 8*2 d.A* T&enty"five percent of participants had Lsub



A&n greater than # d.A! 130of participants had Lsub A&n greater than 13/ d.A!

and #0 of participants had Lsub A&n greater than 13 d.A* According to A%;= ;$*22"

1F! for a 13"year exposure to Lsub A&n of # d.A! the %=PT; for the person of

average %=@L susceptibility is /3 d. @L! the %=PT; for Lsub A&n of 13/ d.A is $F d.

@L! and the %=PT; for Lsub A&n of 13 d.A is #1 d. @L* ompared &ith the age"

e,uivalent hearing thresholds at 2333 @G reported in Annex . of A%;= ;$*22"1F! these

13"year %=PT; estimates reflect shifts in hearing thresholds that are on par &ith the hearing

of a 23"year"old man (for persons exposed to Lsub A&n M # d.A for 13 years)! a #3"

year"old man (for persons exposed to Lsub A&n M 13/ d.A for 13 years)! and a F3"

year"old man (for persons exposed to Lsub A&n M 13 d.A for 13 years)* The average

age of participants in this study &as //*/ years> it is conceivable that in 13 years! some of

these participants &ill be $/ years old and &ill have hearing that is on par &ith men &ho are

decades older*

=n contrast to @ypothesis /! participants &ho commuted using the sub&ay ($*$ d.A) did

not have significantly higher PLD sound exposure than nonsub&ay commuters (/*$ d.A)!

even after &e accounted for those &ho reported ad-usting the volume control on their PLDs*

=t is possible that many more sub&ay riders did reduce the volume control on their device

and failed to disclose that they had done so &hen ased! or that nonsub&ay riders

choose levels on par &ith sub&ay riders*

=n contrast to @ypothesis $! there &as no significant difference bet&een PLDsound exposure for males and females in this study* Previous research has reported that

males choose listening levels that are higher than those chosen by females (e*g*! Torre!

/338)> ho&ever! methods of measurement differ across investigations! &ith some studies

asing participants to ad-ust their listening in a laboratory setting (@odgetts et al* /33>

Torre! /338)! sometimes in response to different levels of ambient sound (+ligorC=ves!

/33F> Portnuff et al*! /33)* =n addition! this study has a larger sample than previous

studies that have found gender differences (+ligorC=ves! /33F> Portnuff et al*! /33> Torre!

/338> 9* 9illiams! /33#)* =n the current study! &e obtained listening levels as participants

entered the campus &ithout prompting or instruction from investigators* =n this &ay! a

measurement &as obtained that &as unbiased by the potentially strange listening

environment of a laboratory or a presupposition on the part of the participants to anticipate

a desired outcome by the investigators* =n addition! all participants! regardless of gender!

may have ad-usted their listening levelbecause of the ambient street noise* Thus! &ith

participants &ho &ere in essence blinded to the fact that their listening level &ould be



audited by researchers! and given the relatively high level of ambient noise in the listening

environment! theremay not be a difference in chosen listening level bet&een genders* This

may mean that participants &ere less susceptible to pressure to conform to cultural norms

concerning risy or &ild behavior (.ooth C %olen /33a! /33b> Lorber! 12)* Hictorian

gender norms! &hich still seem to influence modern"day attitudes! dictate that girls exhibit

lo&er levels of ris"taing behaviors than boys> they are Ksugar and spice!K &hereas boys

are Krough and tumble*K +urthermore! one should expect even fe&er gender differences

&hen looing at private activities such as listening to music &ith headphones! for &hich

there is even less external pressure to conform to gender norms* =t is possible that our

study population is less susceptible to stereotypical gender norms* =t also is possible that

bacground noise in the listening environment overcame gender differences that have been

reported to exist &hen people listen in ,uiet environments (+ligor C =ves! /33F)* :ur

findings are in contrast &ith those of 9* 9illiams (/33#)! &ho also measured chosenlistening levels! this time on a city street in Australia* @e found that men had

soundexposures! on average! that &ere at higher levels than &omen?s (LA8hn M 83*F and

#*$ d.A! respectively)* The overall sound exposure from PLDs in his study of ## individuals

&as lo&er (LA8hn M *8 d.A) than in the present study* Perhaps there are societal

differences bet&een Australia and the Inited ;tates that influenced the outcome for gender*

Limitations of the current study include the fact that much of the estimates relied on the

study participants? accurate report of their duration of PLD use* Ising a single observed

sound level measured on the manne,uin (&hich has an accuracy of / d.) to be

representative of listening level during all listening is tenuous> ho&ever! past studies have

relied on participant self"report (e*g*! +elchlin et al*! 18>9*9illiams! /33#) and! in the

absence of technical solutions to monitor participants? durations of use! self"report is the

most effective measure for surveying use in a large number of participants (Jriffin et al*!

/33)* Additional limitations include the fact that our method allo&ed us to mae

sound exposure estimates only from earbud and over"the"ear headphones! rather than

including in"the"canal earphones* =t has been previously reported that in"the"canal

earphones can produce higher output levels than other earphones (7eith et al*! /338>

Portnuff C +ligor! /33F)! but these earphones provide sound

isolation from ambient noise and so are used at lo&er levels than non"sound isolating

earphones in higher levels of ambient noise (+ligor C =ves! /33F)*

onclusions



stimates of noise exposure based on measured listening levels and reported listening

duration suggest that the average PLD user in this study &as at ris for %=@L*

The exposure estimates indicate that a similar percentage of both sexes are at ris for %=@L!

and the PLD listening environment during participants? commute did not yield obvious

factors influencing PLD sound exposure* Although there is a need for further research to

assess the accuracy of these estimates! these findings &arrant efforts to provide targeted

education for college"age people using PLDs in urban environments*

Although no&ledge of the effect of loud noises on hearing loss has been present in the

literature for the last 133 years (Lonsbury"5artin C 5artin! /33)! the effect of noise on

hearing abilities seems to have not consistently filtered do&n to PLD users in this study! or

perhaps the information is available but has failed to elicit changes in behavior to reduce

ris for %=@L* The social factors described earlier may lead to a reluctance among young

people to protect their hearing* PLD use! particularly at high levels! allo&s young people to

retreat from the noises of noisy and cro&ded public areas and to add a personal soundtrac

to other&ise mundane activities*

Danhauer et al* (/33) reported that the vast ma-ority of college"age students (8F*F0) in

their nation&ide survey believed that using an iPod at Kloud listening levelsK may damage

hearing* +urthermore! responses to Danhauer et al*?s ,uestionnaire suggested that college

students &ish to exercise personal responsibility regarding their hearing health and that

educational outreach campaigns that sensationaliGe hearing loss ris may not be effective*onsidering these previous reports! educational institutions may establish a preventative

program to target the inappropriate use of PLDs (as &ell as other sources of noise)* =n

addition! early identification of students &ith mild hearing loss is essential to provide them

&ith the necessary supports for academic sills and to prevent greater loss of hearing

abilities* To prevent %=@L! it is essential that speech"language pathologists and audiologists

collaborate (5oore! /33> ;miley C Threats! /33F)! given that both professions are a&are

of the negative effects of hearing loss and are committed to the prevention of health

disabilities! specifically those affecting communication*

.roader education on the appropriate use of PLDs and the effect of noise on hearing is

essential (;erra et al*! /33> 9eichbold C Eoro&a! /33)! especially &ith a &orld&ide sale

of /#*F million portable music players in /33# (KPortable 5usic Player 5aret!K /33#)* This

&as an increase of 230 from the previous year (American ;peech"Language"@earing

Association! /33#)* Danhauer et al* (/33) advocated that members of at"ris groups



participate in the design and dissemination of effective educational outreach campaigns*

Jreist! +olmer! and 5artin (/33) evaluated the effectiveness of the %=@L"prevention

curriculum KDangerous DecibelsK and demonstrated that it effected better long"term

outcomes regarding attitudes to&ard %=@L and intended behaviors in the cohort of younger

children compared &ith older children*

Progress in the development of more sophisticated PLDs also plays a role in potential %=@L*

+or example! mass"storage flash memory 5P$ players! such as the iPod! can store

thousands of songs! &hereas older devices! such as D players! have considerably more

limited storage of audio content* There is greater potential for users of ne&er technology to

increase their duration of use* onversely! the ne&er technology could more easily

incorporate soft&are to monitor estimated listening levels and duration of use and provide

the PLD user &ith tools to mae better hearing health choices &hile not being unnecessarily

overprotective* +or instance! simple devices that see only to limit earphone

output level ignore the vitally important ris component of duration of use* ;uch restrictive

measures &ill surely fail in a maret that thrives on individual expression*

9oring To&ard Juidelines for the Prevention of %=@L

These findings and the past literature on the effectiveness of %=@L"prevention curriculum

(Jreist et al*! /33) suggest that it is important that prevention programs begin early!

perhaps at the preschool level! to help prevent younger children from imitating older

children?s inappropriate use of PLDs* Juidelines have been developed to decrease the

number of individuals &ho may experience %=@L (e*g*! +ligor! /33F)* +or example!

individuals should not listen to music for longer than 1*# hr at 830 of the maximum volume

control setting on the portable devices (Portnuff C +ligor! /33F)* The average user is able to

listen to a player at about 30 of full volume for about 2*# hr &ithout ris (Portnuff C +ligor!

/33F)* There are also guidelines for the type of earphone used to reduce the ris of %=@L

(+ligor C ox! /332> PortnuffC +ligor! /33F)* Although the output of in"ear or earbud"style

headphones may be higher than overthe" ear or supra"aural headphones (Portnuff C +ligor!

/33F)! people tend to use their headphones at the same volume level! depending on

bacgroundnoise (+ligor C =ves! /33F)* @o&ever! the primary ris lies in listening to music in

noisy environments! &ith headphone type a secondary concern (+ligor C =ves! /33F)*

ontrary to popular belief! though! using in"ear headphones that completely seal the ear

allo& the user to bloc out bacground noise! and thus those users often choose to listen at

lo&er levels! even in high bacground noise (+ligor C =ves! /33F)* =n summary! guidelines



for both the appropriate listening level and the appropriate headphone type are necessary

to reduce %=@L ris*

=t is &ell established that not everyone shares the same ris of hearing loss! given that

some individuals have KtougherK ears and others have KtenderK ears (@enderson!

;ubramaniam! C.oettcher! 1$)* =t is not possible to predict &ho is more at ris for %=@L>

thus! it is best to exercise caution &hen using PLDs* A most significant problem is that

hearing loss occurs slo&ly> therefore! parents or teachers may not notice this type of

hearing loss in childrenNstudents until it is ,uite extensive* onse,uently! prevention is ey*

The results of the current study suggest that PLDs produce high enough sound levels to

pose a ris of hearing loss! if the device is used at high levels for extended durations* Thus!

PLD users must become a&are of their listening levels and no& the maximum amount of

time they can listen at their chosen level &ithout rising hearing loss* ducational programs

are essential to provide information on the actions necessary minimiGe ris for %=@L*

Acno&ledgment

The research reported in this article &as supported! in part! by a Professional ;taff

ongress"ity Iniversity of %e& 'or 6esearch A&ard*

Sidebar

%oise xposure stimates of Irban 5P$ Player Isers

;andra Levey! Tania Levey! and .rian O* +ligor

O ;peech Lang @ear 6es /311>#2>/F$"/> originally published online Aug #! /313> D:=4

13*1322N13/"2$88(/313N3"3/8$)

The references for this article include 2 @igh9ire"hosted articles &hich you can access for

free at4 http4NN-slhr*asha*orgNcgiNcontentNfullN#2N1N/F$R.=.L

This information is current as of 5arch 1$! /311

This article! along &ith updated information and services! is located on the 9orld 9ide 9eb

at4 http4NN-slhr*asha*orgNcgiNcontentNfullN#2N1N/F$

References

6eferences



Adorno! T* (11)* The culture industry4 ;elected essays on mass culture* London! I74

6outledge*

Airo! *! Pearinen! O*! C :linuora! P* (1F)* Listening to music &ith headphones4 An

assessment of noise exposure* Acustica! 8/! 88#"82*

American %ational ;tandards =nstitute* (1F)* Determination of occupational noise

exposure and estimation of noise induced hearing impairment (A%;= ;$*22"1F)* %e& 'or!

%'4 Author*

American ;peech"Language"@earing Association* (/33#)* Insafe usage of portable music

players may damage your hearing* 6etrieved from http4NN&&&*asha*orgNaboutN

ne&sN/33#Nmp$players*htm*

Associated Press* (/33F! Oune 8)* ;urvey4 iPods more popular than beer*

6etrieved fromhttp4NN&&&*&ashingtonpost*com*

.aughn! 9* L* (1$)* 6elation bet&een daily noise exposure and hearing loss as based on

the evaluation of F8$# industrial noise exposure cases* Inpublished report! Aerospace

5edical 6esearch Laboratory! 9right"Patterson Air +orce .ase! :hio*

.auman! E* (1$)* Postmodern ethics* :xford! I74 .lac&ell*

.en-amin!9* (1$)* The &or of art in the age of mechanical reproduction* =n @* Arendt

(d*)! =lluminations (pp* /1"/2/)* London! I74 %L.*

.erger! * @*! C ;tergar! 5* (/33! +ebruary)* iPoditis"Are &e measuring levels correctly

Paper presented at the $2th Annual %ational @earing onservation Association onference!

Atlanta!JA* 6etrieved fromhttp4NNhearingconservation* orgNdisplaycommon*cfm

anM1CsubarticlenbrM$/*

.lesser! .*! C ;alter! L* (/338)* The unexamined re&ards for excessive loudness*ommunications4 th =nternational ongress on %oise as a Public @ealth Problem*

6etrieved fromhttp4NN&&&*blesser*netNdo&nloadsN=.%0/3/3380 /3+inal*pdf*

.ooth! A* L*! C %olen! P* (/33a)* hoosing to compete4 @o& different are girls and boys

6etrieved fromhttp4NN papers*ssrn*comNsol$NP=PSOournal*cfmpipS-rnlM//$$*



.ooth! A* L*! C %olen! P* (/33b)* Jender differences in ris behaviour4 Does nurture

matter 6etrieved from&&&*cepr* orgNpubsNdpsNDP18*asp*asp*

.oradar! P* (/33F)* 13!333 songs in your pocet4 The iPod as a transportable environment*

=n 6* +* +rancis! 6* 7rohenburg! C +* 7lassen ( ds*)! Transportable environments $ ( pp* /1"

/)* %e& 'or! %'4 Taylor C +rancis*

.ull! 5* (/33)* ;ound moves4 iPod culture and urban experience* London! I74 6outledge*

.urns! 9*! C 6obinson! D* 9* (13)* @earing and noise in industry* London! I74 @er

5a-esty?s ;tationery :ffice*

lar! 9* 9* (1/)* @earing4 The effects of noise* :tolaryngology"@ead and %ec ;urgery!

13F! FF"FF*

Danhauer! O* L*! Oohnson! * *! .yrd! A*! DeJood! L*! 5euel! *! Pecile! A*! C 7och! L* L*

(/33)* ;urvey of college students on iPod use and hearing health* Oournal of the American

Academy of Audiology! /3! #"/*

Daniel! * (/33)* %oise and hearing loss4 A revie&* Oournal of ;chool @ealth! ! //#"/$1*

Du Jay! P*! @all! ;*! Oones! L*! 5acay! @*! C %egus! L* (1)* Doing cultural studies4 The

story of the ;ony9alman* London! I74 ;age*

+elchlin! =*! @ohmann! .* 9*! C 5atefi! L* (18)* Personal cassette players4 A haGard to

hearing =n D* Prasher! L* Luxon!C=* Pyyo (ds*)! Advances in noise research4 Hol* /*

Protection against noise (pp* #"133)* London! I74 9hurr*

+ligor! .* O* (/33F)* KPortableK music and its ris to hearing health*

6etrieved fromhttp4NN&&&*hearingrevie&*comN issues N/33F"3$*asp*

+ligor! .* O* (/33)* Personal listening devices and hearing loss4 ;eeing evidence of a long

term problem through a successful short"term investigation* %oise C @ealth! 11(22)! 1/"

1$1*

+ligor! .* O*! C ox! L* * (/332)* :utput levels of commercially available portable compact

disc players and the potential ris to hearing* ar and @earing! /#! #1$"#/*



+ligor! .* O*! C =ves! T* * (/33F! :ctober)* Does headphone type affect ris for

recreational noise"induced hearing loss Paper presented at the %oise"=nduced @earing Loss

in hildren meeting! incinnati! :@*

6etrieved from http4NNhearingconservation*orgNdisplaycommon* cfm

anM1CsubarticlenbrM11/*

Jershon! 6* 6* 5*! %eitGel! 6*! .arrera! 5* A*! C Aram! 5* (/33F)* Pilot survey of sub&ay

and bus stop noise levels* Oournal of Irban @ealth! 8$! 83/"811*

Joffman! * (1#)* The presentation of self in everyday life* %e& 'or! %'4 Doubleday*

Jo&ensmith! 9*! C .loom! L* (1)* The effect of heavy metal music on arousal and anger*

Oournal of 5usic Therapy! $2! $$"2#*

Jriest! ;* *! +olmer! 6* L*! C 5artin! 9* @* (/33)* ffectiveness of KDangerous Decibels!K a

school"based hearing loss prevention program* American Oournal of Audiology! 1F! ;1F#"

;181*

Jriffin! ;* *! %eitGel! 6*! Daniell! 9* *! C ;eixas! %* ;* (/33)* =ndicators of hearing

protection use4 ;elf"report and researcher observation* Oournal of :ccupational and

nvironmental @ygiene! F! F$"F2*

@eidegger! 5* (1F/)* .eing and time* %e& 'or! %'4 @arper C 6o&*

@enderson! D*! ;ubramaniam! 5*! C .oettcher! +* A* (1$)* =ndividual susceptibility

to noise"induced hearing loss4 An old topic revisited* ar and @earing! 12! 1#/"1F8*

@odgetts! 9* *! 6ieger! O* 5*! C ;Garo! 6* A* (/33)* The effects of listening environment

and earphone style on preferred listening levels of normal hearing adults using an 5P$

player* ar and @earing! /8! /3"/*

@olgers! 7* 5*! C Pettersson! .* (/33#)* %oise exposure and sub-ective hearing symptomsamong school children in ;&eden* %oise C @ealth! (/)! /"$*

@uron! D* (/33F)* ;&eet anticipation* ambridge! 5A4 5=T Press*



=nternational :rganisation for ;tandardisation* (13)* =;: 14 Acoustics"Determination

of noise exposureand estimation of noise induced hearing impairment* Jeneva! ;&itGerland4

Author*

=nternational :rganisation for ;tandardisation* (/33/)* =;: 1132"14 Acoustics"

Determination of sound emission from sound sources placed close to the ear* Part 1*

Techni,ue using a microphone in a real ear (5=6 techni,ue)* Jeneva! ;&itGerland4 Author*

Oones! D* (/33#)* iPod! therefore = am4 Thining inside the &hite box* %e& 'or! %'4

.loomsbury*

7eith! ;* 6*! 5ichaud! D* ;*! C hiu! H* (/338)* valuating the maximum playbac

sound levels from portable digital audio players* The Oournal of the Acoustical ;ociety of

America! 1/$! 2//"2/$*

7otarba! O* A* (12)* The positive functions of roc and roll music for children and their

parents* =n O* .est ( d*)! Troubling children4 ;tudies of children and social problems ( pp*

1##"11)* %e& 'or! %'4 Aldine de Jruyter*

Lempert! .* L*! C @enderson! T* L* (1$)* :ccupational noise and hearing 1F8 to 1/4 A

%=:;@ study* incinnati! :@4 I*;* Department of @ealth! ducation! and 9elfare! Public

@ealth ;ervice! enter for Disease ontrol! %ational =nstitute for :ccupational ;afety and

@ealth! Division of Laboratories and riteria Development*

Levitin! D* (/33F)* This is your brain on music4 The science of human obsession* %e& 'or!

%'4 Penguin*

Levy! ;* (/33F)* The perfect thing4 @o& the iPod shuffles commerce! culture! and coolness*

%e& 'or! %'4 ;imon C ;chuster*

Lonsbury"5artin! .* L*! C 5artin! J* 7* (/33)* 5odern music"playing devices as hearing

health riss* Acoustics Today! $(2)! 1F"1*

Lorber! O* (12)* Paradoxes of gender* %e& @aven! T4 'ale Iniversity Press*

5arcuse! @* (1F2)* :ne"dimensional man* London! I74 6outledge*



5artin! J* '*! C 5artin! 9* @* (/33)* The Oolene cooboo* Portland! :64 :regon @ealth C

;cience Iniversity* 6etrieved from http4NN&&&*dangerousdecibels*orgN

educationN-oleneNcooboo N-olene"cooboo"do&nload N*

5cLuhan! 5* (1F)* The medium is the message4 An inventory of effects* %e& 'or! %'4

.antam*

5elni! 9* (11)* @uman temporary threshold shift (TT;) and damage ris* The Oournal of

the Acoustical ;ociety of America! 3! 12"1#2*

5oore! 5* (/33! Oanuary /3)* /33 A;@A President ;ue T* @alle4 A clinician! a teacher! and

a leader* The A;@A Leader! 12(1)! /3"/$*

%ational =nstitute for :ccupational ;afety and @ealth* (18)* riteria for a recommendedstandard4 :ccupational noise exposure! revised criteria* 6etrieved from http4NN&&&*

nonoise*orgNhearingNcriteriaNcriteria*htm*

%ational =nstitute on Deafness and :ther ommunication Disorders* (/33)* %oise"induced

hearing loss* 6etrieved from http4NN&&&*nidcd*nih*govNhealthNhearingN noise*asp*

%isar! A*! 7iesGa! ;*! @olmes! A*! steban! D*! 6ubin! *! C .rody! D* (/331)* stimated

prevalence of noiseinduced hearing threshold shifts among children F"1 years of age4 The

Third%ational @ealth and %utrition xamination ;urvey! 188"2! Inited ;tates* Pediatrics!

138! 23"2$*

:ccupational ;afety and @ealth Administration* (18$)* @earing onservation Amendment

+inal 6ule* +ederal 6egister! 28! F"8#*

Passchier"Hermeer! 9* (1F8)* @earing loss due to exposure to steady"state

broadband noise* 6etrievedfrom http4NN

&&&*occupationalhearingloss*comNpo&erSpointSlectureN

occupationalShearingSlossSfilesNframe*htmRslide3311*htm*

Peng! O*! Tao! E*! C @uang! E* (/33)* 6is of damage to hearing from personal listening

devices in young adults* Oournal of :tolaryngology! $F! 181"18#*

Portable music player maret expected to double by the end of /33# (press release)*

(/33#)* 6etrieved fromhttp4NN&&&* canalys*com*



Portnuff! * D* +*! C +ligor! .* O* (/33F! :ctober)* ;ound output levels of the iPod and other

5P$ players4 =s there potential ris to hearing Paper presented at the %oise" =nduced

@earing Loss in hildren meeting! incinnati! :@*

6etrieved from http4NNhearingconservation*orgN displaycommon*cfm

anM1CsubarticlenbrM11/*

Portnuff! * D* +*! +ligor! .* O*! C Arehart! 7* @* (/33! +ebruary)* Adolescent use of 5P$

players4 A haGard to hearing Paper presented at the $2th annual %ational @earing

onservation Association onference! Atlanta! JA*

6etrieved from http4NNhearingconservation*orgN displaycommon*cfm

anM1CsubarticlenbrM$/*

Prince! 5* 5*! ;tayner! L* T*! ;mith! 6* O*! C Jilbert! ;* O* (1)* A re"examination of ris

estimates from the %=:;@ :ccupational %oise and @earing ;urvey (:%@;)* The Oournal of

the Acoustical ;ociety of America! 131! #3"F$*

Putnam! 6* (/333)* .o&ling alone4 The collapse and revival of American community* %e&

'or! %'4 ;imon C ;chuster*

6abino&itG! P* (/333)* %oise"induced hearing loss* American +amily Physician! F1! /2"

/#* 6etrieved fromhttp4NN &&&*aafp*orgNafp/33333#31N/2*html*

6ice! * J*! 6ossi! J*! C :lina! 5* (18)* Damage ris from personal cassette players*

.ritish Oournal of Audiology! /1! /"/88*

6oyster! O* D* (1F)* %oise"induced hearing loss* =n O* %orthern ( d*)! @earing disorders

($rd ed*! pp* 1"18)* %eedham @eights! 5A4 Allyn C .acon*

;ennett! 6* (13)* The conscience of the eye4 The design and social life of cities* London!

I74 +aber C +aber*

;erra! 5* 6*! .iassoni! * *! @inalaf! 5*! Pavli! 5*! Hillalobo! O* P*! uret! *! * * * 'acci! 5* 6*

(/33)* Program for the conservation and promotion of hearing among adolescents*

American Oournal of Audiology! 1F! ;1#8";1F2*

;immel! J* (1)* ;immel on culture* London! I74 ;age*



;imun! 5* (/33)* 5y music! my &orld4 Ising the 5P$ player to shape experience in

London* %e& 5edia C ;ociety! 11! /1"21*

;miley! D* +*! C Threats! T* (/33F)* Audiologists and speechlanguage pathologists &oring

together to serve children* Perspectives on ommunication Disorders and ;ciences in

ulturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations! 1$! /2"/8*

;Geliga! 6* (/33)* The public"private soundscape* %e& reative ;trategies! 1*

6etrieved fromhttp4NN&&&*robsGeliga* comNThe0/3Public"Private*pdf*

Torre! P* (/338)* 'oung adults? use and output level settings of personal music systems* ar

and @earing! /! 1"*

9eichbold! H*! C Eoro&a! P* (/33)* an a hearing education campaign for adolescentschange their music listening behavior =nternational Oournal of Audiology! 2F! 1/8"1$$*

9illiams! 6* (18$)* To&ards /333* London! I74 hatto C 9indus*

9illiams! 9* (/33#)* %oise exposure levels from personal stereo use* =nternational Oournal

of Audiology! 22! /$1"/$F*

9orthington! D* A*! ;iegel! O* @*! 9ilber! L* A*! +aber! .* 5*! Duncley! 7* T*! Jarsteci! D* *!

C Dhar! ;* (/33)* omparing t&o methods to measure preferredlistening levels of personal listening devices* The Oournal of the Acoustical ;ociety of

America! 1/#! $$$"$21*

Eogby! O* (/33F)* ;urvey of teens and adults about the use of personal electronic devices

and head phones* 6etrieved from http4NN&&&*asha*orgNuploaded+ilesNaboutNne&sN

atitbtotNGogbySsurvey/33F*pdf*

AuthorAffiliation

;andra Levey

Lehman ollege of the ity Iniversity of %e& 'or

Tania Levey

'or ollege of the ity Iniversity of %e& 'or



.rian O* +ligor

hildren?s @ospital .oston! .oston! 5assachusetts! and @arvard 5edical ;chool! ambridge!

5assachusetts

AuthorAffiliation

6eceived December /2! /33

6evision received 5ay 13! /313

Accepted Oune 1! /313

D:=4 13*1322N13/"2$88(/313N3"3/8$)

ontact author4 .rian O* +ligor! hildren?s @ospital .oston! Department of :tolaryngology

and ommunication Disorders! $33 Long&ood Avenue! +egan ! .oston! 5A 3/11#* "mail4

brian*fligorchildrens*harvard*edu*

Appendix

Appendix* The ,uestionnaire used in this study*

D:.4 SSSSSSSSSS Age4 SSSSSSSSSS

Device4 iPodSSSSS :ther SSSSSSSSSS

Date4 SSSSSSSSSS

+emale SSSSSSSSSS 5ale SSSSSSSSSSSS

Oust got off the sub&ay ';SSSSS %:SSSSS

=s the volume control of your 5P$ player the same since you left the sub&ay

'; SSSSS %:SSSSS

:n days &hen you use your 5P$ player! ho& long do you usually listen SSSSS hours

@o& many days each &ee SSSSS days



ar phone type4

SSSSS arbud

SSSSS :n"the"ear (;upra"aural earphone)

SSSSS ompletely"around"the ear (ircumaural earphone)

SSSSS =n"the"canal ( =nsert earphone)

=nitials of data recorder4 SSSSS

Decibels4

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

9ord count4 942

opyright American ;peech"Language"@earing Association +eb 1! /311

!ndexin" (details)ite

Sub#ect

:ccupational safety>

@earing impairment>

@earing protection>

%oise>

ars C hearing>

olleges C universities>

6esearch C development""6CD>

Prevention programs

Title

%oise xposure stimates of Irban 5P$ Player Isers

Author

Levey! ;andra> Levey! Tania> +ligor! .rian O

$ublication title

Oournal of ;peech! Language and @earing 6esearch (:nline)

%olume

#2

http://search.proquest.com/docview.fullcitation.citethis:updatecitationlink/DocView/relevance/citeThisZonecitethis_0/prod.academic_MSTAR_858019991?t:ac=858019991/Record/1421E16919D6655BA9/1

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Occupational+safety/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Hearing+impairment/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Hearing+protection/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Noise/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Ears+$26+hearing/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Colleges+$26+universities/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Research+$26+development--R$26D/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Prevention+programs/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/au/Levey,+Sandra/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/au/Levey,+Tania/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/au/Fligor,+Brian+J/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/pubidlinkhandler/sng/pub/Journal+of+Speech,+Language+and+Hearing+Research+$28Online$29/ExactMatch/135351/DocView/858019991/fulltext/1421E16919D6655BA9/1?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexingvolumeissuelinkhandler/135351/Journal+of+Speech,+Language+and+Hearing+Research+$28Online$29/02011Y02Y01$23Feb+1,+2011$3b++Vol.+54+$281$29/54/1?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/docview.fullcitation.citethis:updatecitationlink/DocView/relevance/citeThisZonecitethis_0/prod.academic_MSTAR_858019991?t:ac=858019991/Record/1421E16919D6655BA9/1

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Occupational+safety/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Hearing+impairment/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Hearing+protection/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Noise/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Ears+$26+hearing/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Colleges+$26+universities/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Research+$26+development--R$26D/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/subject/Prevention+programs/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/au/Levey,+Sandra/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/au/Levey,+Tania/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/au/Fligor,+Brian+J/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/pubidlinkhandler/sng/pub/Journal+of+Speech,+Language+and+Hearing+Research+$28Online$29/ExactMatch/135351/DocView/858019991/fulltext/1421E16919D6655BA9/1?accountid=49910




!ssue

1

$a"es

/F$"/A

&umber of pa"es

1F

$ublication year

/311

$ublication date

+eb 1! /311

'ear

/311

$ublisher

American ;peech"Language"@earing Association

$lace of publication

6ocville

ountry of publication

Inited ;tates

$ublication sub#ect

5edical ;ciences"":torhinolaryngology! @andicapped""@earing =mpaired

Source type

;cholarly Oournals

an"ua"e of publication

nglish

*ocument type

+eature

*ocument featureTables>,uations>Jraphs>6eferences

$ro+uest document !*

8#8311

*ocument ,R

http4NNsearch*pro,uest*comNdocvie&N8#8311accountidM213


http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/jsu/Medical+Sciences--Otorhinolaryngology/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/jsu/Handicapped--Hearing+Impaired/$N?accountid=49910


http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/jsu/Medical+Sciences--Otorhinolaryngology/$N?accountid=49910

http://search.proquest.com/indexinglinkhandler/sng/jsu/Handicapped--Hearing+Impaired/$N?accountid=49910



opyri"ht

opyright American ;peech"Language"@earing Association +eb 1! /311

ast updated

/311"13"13

*atabase

Pro<uest 5edical Library

Documents

Noise Exposure Estimates of Urban MP3 Player Users