Open Access
Acta Acust.
Volume 7, 2023
Article Number 9
Number of page(s) 7
Section Virtual Acoustics
Published online 20 February 2023
  1. Health and Safety Executive: Improving the safety of workers in the vicinity of mobile plant. 2001. Report Number 358, Retrieved from (Accessed September 3, 2019). [Google Scholar]
  2. J.P. Purswell, J.L. Purswell: The effectiveness of audible backup alarms as indicated by Osha accident investigation records. Advances in Occupational Ergonomics and Safety 4 (2001) 444–452. [Google Scholar]
  3. C. Laroche, M.J. Ross, L. Lefebvre, R. Larocque: Determination of the optimal acoustic characteristics of backup alarms. Research Report R-117/IRSST [In French], Montreal, Canada. 1995. [Google Scholar]
  4. V. Vaillancourt, H. Nélisse, C. Laroche, C. Giguère, J. Boutin, P. Lafferrière: Comparison of sound propagation and perception of three types of backup alarms with regards to worker safety. Noise and Health 15, 67 (2013) 420–436. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. H.P. Morgan, R.J. Peppin: Noiseless and safer back-up alarms, 2008, in Proceedings of the NOISE-CON 2008 conference from The Institute of Noise Control Engineering on July 28–31, 2008, Dearborn, Michigan, USA, 8 p. [Google Scholar]
  6. V. Vaillancourt, H. Nélisse, C. Laroche, C. Giguère, J. Boutin, P. Lafferrière: Safety of workers behind heavy vehicles – assessment of three types of reverse alarm. Research Report R-833/IRSST, Montreal, Canada. 2012. [Google Scholar]
  7. D.R. Begault, E.M. Wenzel, M.R. Anderson: Direct comparison of the impact of head tracking, reverberation, and individualized head-related transfer functions of the spatial perception of a virtual speech source. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society 49 (2001) 904–916. [Google Scholar]
  8. P.A. Gauthier, C. Camier, F.A. Lebel, Y. Pasco, A. Berry, J. Langlois, C. Verron, C. Guastavino: Experiments of multichannel least-square methods for sound field reproduction inside aircraft mock-up: Objective evaluations. Journal of Sound and Vibration 376, 18 (2016) 194–216. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. A. Berry, P.-A. Gauthier, H. Nélisse, F. Sgard: Reproduction of industrial sound environments applicable to audibility studies on alarms and other sound signals, in The Context of Occupational Health and Safety: Proof of Concept. Research Report R-937/IRSST [In French], Montreal, Canada. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  10. ISO: ISO 7731: 2003 Ergonomics – danger signals for public and work areas – auditory danger signals. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva. 2003. [Google Scholar]
  11. W.D. Wayne: Friedman two-way analysis of variance by ranks. Applied non parametric statistics. 2nd ed., PWS-Kent, Boston. 1990, p. 503. [Google Scholar]
  12. R Core Team: R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  13. W.R. Thurlow, J.W. Mangels, P.S. Runge: Head movements during sound localization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 42 (1967) 489–493. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. W.R. Thurlow, P.S. Runge: Effect of induced head movementson localization of direction of sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 42 (1967) 480–488. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. S. Perrett, W. Noble: The contribution of head motion cues to localization of low-pass noise. Perception & Psychophysics 59 (1997) 1018–1026. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. S. Perrett, W. Noble: The effect of head rotations on vertical plane sound localization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 102 (1997) 2325–2332. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. M. Kato, H. Uematsu, M. Kashino, T. Hirahara: The effect of head motion on the accuracy of sound localization. Acoustical Science and Technology 24 (2003) 315–317. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.