Deductive development and validation of a questionnaire to assess sensitivity to very low and very high frequency sounds: SISUS-Q (Sensitivity to Infra-Sound and Ultra-Sound Questionnaire)
Standard
Deductive development and validation of a questionnaire to assess sensitivity to very low and very high frequency sounds: SISUS-Q (Sensitivity to Infra-Sound and Ultra-Sound Questionnaire). / Ascone, Leonie; Uppenkamp, Stefan; Behler, Oliver; Lineton, Ben; Burke, Elisa; Koch, Christian; Kühn, Simone; Geršak, Gregor.
In: NOISE HEALTH, Vol. 21, No. 101, 101, 29.07.2020, p. 173-182.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Deductive development and validation of a questionnaire to assess sensitivity to very low and very high frequency sounds: SISUS-Q (Sensitivity to Infra-Sound and Ultra-Sound Questionnaire)
AU - Ascone, Leonie
AU - Uppenkamp, Stefan
AU - Behler, Oliver
AU - Lineton, Ben
AU - Burke, Elisa
AU - Koch, Christian
AU - Kühn, Simone
AU - Geršak, Gregor
N1 - Company: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd. Distributor: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd. Institution: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd. Label: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd. Publisher: Medknow Publications
PY - 2020/7/29
Y1 - 2020/7/29
N2 - Objective: Auditory research and complaints about environmental noise indicate that there exists a significant, small subgroup within the population which is sensitive towards infra- and low-frequency or ultra- and high-frequency sounds (ILF/UHF). This paper reports on the development, factorization and validation of measures of sensitivity towards frequencies outside the common hearing range.Design: A multinational, cross-sectional survey study was run. Principal component analyses and exploratory factor analyses were conducted in a sample of 267 Europeans (from the UK, Slovenia, and Germany).Results: The factor analyses suggested that ILF versus UHF sensitivity constitute different factors, each characterized by sensory perception, stress-responsivity, and behavioral avoidance. A third factor comprising beliefs of dangerousness of ILF and UHF emerged. The factors explained 72% of the variance. The factor-solution was replicated separately for the English (n = 98) and German (n = 169) versions of the questionnaire (Slovenians and UK residents filled out the English version). Acceptable to excellent reliability was found. ILF and UHF sensitivity were moderately related to noise sensitivity in the normal hearing range, suggesting the new measures are not redundant. Correlations with psychiatric and somatic symptoms were small to moderate. ILF sensitivity correlated with neuroticism (small effect) and daytime sleepiness (moderate effect). ILF and UHF sensitivity were related to agreeableness (small effects). Overall, the novel ILF and UHF sensitivity scales seems to provide a solid tool for conducting further research on the role of sensitivity concerning adverse effects of ILF and UHF sound (e.g. health outcomes, annoyance ratings). The questionnaire consortium recommends using the new scales in combination with established measures of normal hearing range sensitivity.
AB - Objective: Auditory research and complaints about environmental noise indicate that there exists a significant, small subgroup within the population which is sensitive towards infra- and low-frequency or ultra- and high-frequency sounds (ILF/UHF). This paper reports on the development, factorization and validation of measures of sensitivity towards frequencies outside the common hearing range.Design: A multinational, cross-sectional survey study was run. Principal component analyses and exploratory factor analyses were conducted in a sample of 267 Europeans (from the UK, Slovenia, and Germany).Results: The factor analyses suggested that ILF versus UHF sensitivity constitute different factors, each characterized by sensory perception, stress-responsivity, and behavioral avoidance. A third factor comprising beliefs of dangerousness of ILF and UHF emerged. The factors explained 72% of the variance. The factor-solution was replicated separately for the English (n = 98) and German (n = 169) versions of the questionnaire (Slovenians and UK residents filled out the English version). Acceptable to excellent reliability was found. ILF and UHF sensitivity were moderately related to noise sensitivity in the normal hearing range, suggesting the new measures are not redundant. Correlations with psychiatric and somatic symptoms were small to moderate. ILF sensitivity correlated with neuroticism (small effect) and daytime sleepiness (moderate effect). ILF and UHF sensitivity were related to agreeableness (small effects). Overall, the novel ILF and UHF sensitivity scales seems to provide a solid tool for conducting further research on the role of sensitivity concerning adverse effects of ILF and UHF sound (e.g. health outcomes, annoyance ratings). The questionnaire consortium recommends using the new scales in combination with established measures of normal hearing range sensitivity.
KW - Acoustic Stimulation
KW - Adolescent
KW - Adult
KW - Aged
KW - Auditory Threshold
KW - Factor Analysis, Statistical
KW - Female
KW - Germany
KW - Hearing
KW - Hearing Tests
KW - Humans
KW - Male
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Principal Component Analysis
KW - Reproducibility of Results
KW - Slovenia
KW - Surveys and Questionnaires
KW - Ultrasonic Waves
KW - United Kingdom
KW - Young Adult
U2 - 10.4103/nah.NAH_46_19
DO - 10.4103/nah.NAH_46_19
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 32719305
VL - 21
SP - 173
EP - 182
JO - NOISE HEALTH
JF - NOISE HEALTH
SN - 1463-1741
IS - 101
M1 - 101
ER -
