Noise & health · 2026
Sound Distraction and Mental Health in the Workplace: The Role of Coping Strategies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bergefurt Lisanne, Appel-Meulenbroek Rianne, Arentze Theo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Guided by Person-Environment Fit theory, this study examines how perceived sound distraction and disturbance, coping strategies and personal characteristics relate to mental health outcomes in office environments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected from two organisations (N = 214). Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the complex relationships between sound distraction, coping strategies, personal characteristics and a broad set of mental health outcomes.
RESULTS: The measurement model confirmed that three items loaded onto each mental health factor, which were strongly interrelated. Stressful mood was significantly associated with exhaustion (β = 0.57, t = 6.64) and fatigue (β = 0.21, t = 4.86) and also correlated with poor sleep quality (β = -0.59, t = -4.42) and disengagement (β = -0.34, t = -2.88). Employees reporting low concentration and poor sleep tended to feel more disengaged. Perceived distraction was negatively related to concentration (β = -0.67, t = -5.38). Disturbance from unintelligible background sounds was linked to higher exhaustion (β = 0.10, t = -2.99), whereas disturbance from intelligible speech showed an inverse relationship with exhaustion (β = -0.11, t = -2.63). Both disturbance types were strongly correlated and associated with increased distraction. Coping strategies were predominantly avoidance-based; notably, working more slowly than usual was associated with disturbance from speech (β = 0.18, t = 3.17), while trying to be quieter was linked to disturbance from unintelligible sounds (β = 0.28, t = 3.44). Greater effort was paradoxically related to higher fatigue (β = 0.24, t = 2.41) but lower disengagement (β = -0.098, t = -2.46). Noise-sensitive employees reported higher stressful mood (β = 0.19, t = 3.62) and were more likely to adopt avoidance coping strategies (β = 0.42, t = 6.88). The lack of concentration spaces and frequent individual-focused tasks amplified the distraction and disturbance.
CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the complex interplay among sound, coping and mental health. Organisations should reduce chronic noise stressors and, based on theory and prior research, encourage approach-oriented coping to mitigate long-term risks. Providing acoustically optimised spaces and interventions such as sound masking can improve person-environment fit and support employee well-being.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected from two organisations (N = 214). Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the complex relationships between sound distraction, coping strategies, personal characteristics and a broad set of mental health outcomes.
RESULTS: The measurement model confirmed that three items loaded onto each mental health factor, which were strongly interrelated. Stressful mood was significantly associated with exhaustion (β = 0.57, t = 6.64) and fatigue (β = 0.21, t = 4.86) and also correlated with poor sleep quality (β = -0.59, t = -4.42) and disengagement (β = -0.34, t = -2.88). Employees reporting low concentration and poor sleep tended to feel more disengaged. Perceived distraction was negatively related to concentration (β = -0.67, t = -5.38). Disturbance from unintelligible background sounds was linked to higher exhaustion (β = 0.10, t = -2.99), whereas disturbance from intelligible speech showed an inverse relationship with exhaustion (β = -0.11, t = -2.63). Both disturbance types were strongly correlated and associated with increased distraction. Coping strategies were predominantly avoidance-based; notably, working more slowly than usual was associated with disturbance from speech (β = 0.18, t = 3.17), while trying to be quieter was linked to disturbance from unintelligible sounds (β = 0.28, t = 3.44). Greater effort was paradoxically related to higher fatigue (β = 0.24, t = 2.41) but lower disengagement (β = -0.098, t = -2.46). Noise-sensitive employees reported higher stressful mood (β = 0.19, t = 3.62) and were more likely to adopt avoidance coping strategies (β = 0.42, t = 6.88). The lack of concentration spaces and frequent individual-focused tasks amplified the distraction and disturbance.
CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the complex interplay among sound, coping and mental health. Organisations should reduce chronic noise stressors and, based on theory and prior research, encourage approach-oriented coping to mitigate long-term risks. Providing acoustically optimised spaces and interventions such as sound masking can improve person-environment fit and support employee well-being.