Experimental assessment of the effect of wearing hearing protectors on the audibility of railway warning signals for normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners

References

• Wilkins PA. A field study to assess the effects of wearing hearing protectors on the perception of warning sounds in an industrial environment. Appl Acoust. 1984;17(6):413–437. doi:10.1016/0003-682X(84)90003-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The European Parliament and the Council. Directive 2003/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 February 2003 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (noise). OJ. 2003;L42:38–44.
   Google Scholar
• Arz JP, Gettliffe JP, Delattre P. Effect of wearing hearing protectors on the audibility of railway warning signals – an experimental study. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2018;24(1):149–159. PubMed PMID: 28869404. doi:10.1080/10803548.2017.1375733
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giguère C, Berger EH. Modeling the interaction between the hearing protector attenuation function and the hearing loss profile on sound detection in noise. In: Euronoise 2015. Proceedings of the 10th European Congress and Exposition on Noise Control Engineering; 2015 May 31–Jun 3; Maastricht. 2015. p. 1967–1972.
   Google Scholar
• Lazarus H. Signal recognition and hearing protectors with normal and impaired hearing. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2005;11(3):233–250. doi:10.1080/10803548.2005.11076646
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilkins PA, Martin AM. Hearing protection and warning sounds in industry – a review. Appl Acoust. 1987;21(4):267–293. doi:10.1016/0003-682X(87)90050-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng Y, Giguère C, Laroche C, et al. A psychoacoustical model for specifying the level and spectrum of acoustic warning signals in the workplace. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2007;4(2):87–98. doi:10.1080/15459620601115768
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Acoustics – statistical distribution of hearing thresholds related to age and gender. Geneva: ISO; 2017. Standard No. ISO 7029:2017.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Acoustics – determination of occupational noise exposure and estimation of noise-induced hearing impairment. Geneva: ISO; 2013. Standard No. ISO 1999:2013.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR. Formulae describing frequency selectivity as a function of frequency and level, and their use in calculating excitation patterns. Hear Res. 1987;28:209–225. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(87)90050-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leek MR, Summers V. Auditory filter shapes of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners in continuous broadband noisea. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1993;94(6):3127–3137. doi:10.1121/1.407218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ. Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hearing Research. 1990;47(1–2):103–138. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(90)90170-T
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Committee for Standardization (CEN). Hearing protectors – recommandations for selection, use, care and maintenance – guidance document. Brussels: CEN; 2016. Standard No. EN 458:2016.
   Google Scholar
• Liedtke M. German criteria for selection of hearing protectors in the interest of good signal audibility. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2009;15(2):163–174. doi:10.1080/10803548.2009.11076797
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Acoustics – hearing protectors – part 1: subjective method for the measurement of sound attenuation. Geneva: ISO; 2018. Standard No. ISO 4869-1:2018.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. An introduction to the psychology of hearing. 6th ed. Bingley: Emerald; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• ANSI/ASA S3.4 – procedure for the computation of loudness of steady sounds. Melville (NY): Acoustical Society of America (ASA); 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Levitt H. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am. 1971;49(2B):467–477. PubMed PMID: 5541744. doi:10.1121/1.1912375
   Google Scholar
• Royston P. Approximating the Shapiro–Wilk W-test for non-normality. Stat Comput. 1992;2(3):117–119. doi:10.1007/BF01891203
   Google Scholar
• Wilcoxon F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics. 1945;1(6):80–83. doi:10.2307/3001968
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaillancourt V, Nélisse H, Laroche C, et al. Comparison of sound propagation and perception of three types of backup alarms with regards to worker safety. Noise Health. 2013;15(67):420–436. doi:10.4103/1463-1741.121249
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Ergonomics – danger signals for public and work areas – auditory danger signals. Geneva: ISO; 2003. Standard No. ISO 7731:2003.
   Google Scholar
• Gertler J, Hartenbaum N, Viale A, et al. Medical standards for railroad workers. Washington (DC): Federal Railroad Administration; 2005 [cited 2020 Oct 15]. Available from: https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/1600/MedicalStandardsRpt2005.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Committee for Standardization (CEN). Hearing protectors – safety requirements and testing – part 5: active noise reduction ear-muffs. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization (CEN); 2002. Standard No. EN 352-5:2002.
   Google Scholar