PROCEEDINGS of the
23rd International Congress on Acoustics
9 to 13 September 2019 in Aachen, Germany

Investigation on the restorative effect of soundscape in parks inhigh-density cities——Taking Lu Xun ParkShenyang, China as an example
Ruining Zhang1; Ling Zhu1; Yuan Zhang 2*
1

School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenyang Jianzhu University, China

2

School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenyang Jianzhu University, Eco-Building Physics Technology and
Evaluation Provincial Key Lab, China

ABSTRACT
Urban parks, in addition to providing a rest space for urban residents, also provide a restorative environment
for relieving stress and relaxing. As the main environmental factor, soundscape affects environmental
restorative quality. Small parks in high-density cities have special soundscape characteristics due to theircrowded population. This paper selected a small city park in the central area of a city ---- Lu Xun Park
˄4,3000 ΃˅ and conducted soundscape study, including sound pressure level measurement, acoustic event
recording, restorative effect evaluation and tourist questionnaire; ArcGIS was used for interpolation analysis
and spatial analysis, and a soundscape map was constracted to explore the effects of soundscape on
restorative effects.
The results showed that:ķLAeq within the park ranged from: 44.5 dB(A) to 73.8dB(A), and exhibited
obvious patterns in time and space;ĸSound composition included rich citizen activity sounds, natural sounds
and surrounding road traffic sound. There are characteristic differences between these acoustic events interms of significance and range of transmission, etc;ĹSound pressure level, acoustic event composition andlandscape features combined affect the soundscape restorative quality of different patches.
Keywords: small parks, soundscape restoration, soundscape map

1. INTRODUCTION
The typical characteristics of today's high-density urban life are excessive stimulation, accelerated
rhythm, increased pressure on social competition, and increased adverse emotions , which are likely tocause a variety of mental illnesses such as depression (1). In some environments, it can help people
reduce stress and various related negative emotions, reduce mental fatigue and even promote mental
and physical health. This environment is called a “restorative environment” (2). The concept of“restorative environment” was first proposed by Kaplan and Talbot (1983), professors of the
University of Michigan in the United States. They studied the psychological impact of two weeks oflife away from city and found that it had a restorative function for most people. Kaplan proposes theconcept of “restorative environment” and defines it as an environment that enables people to betterrecover from mental fatigue and negative emotions associated with stress (3).
Based on the characters of urban human settlements in China, the national standard “Park Design
Specification GB51192” defined a park as: “A park is for public visits, viewing, rest, scientific culture
and physical exercise, with completed facilities and green environment" (4). Urban parks dominatedby the natural environment, especially those close to people's residences, in addition to the need toassume general functions, also have important significance for the provision of restorati ve benefits(5).
In 2014, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) defined Soundscape as acoustic
environment as perceived or experienced and/or understood by a person or people, in context (6). The
promotion or hindrance of environment restoration quality are called "soundscape restoration
2*876

jzdxzhy@163.com

benefits" (7).
This paper selected Lu Xun Park, a small high-density urban park in Shenyang. The surrounding
residential areas are dense, and three sides of it are adjacent to the urban roads. The natural landscapeinside the park is abundant, and various acoustic events occur regularly, giving an abundantsoundscape. Through the investigation and comparison of L Aeq in different periods, this paper analysed
acoustic environment quality, and classified typical acoustic events. Typical acoustic events wereselected and their impact area were recorded. These were used to analyse the restorative quality oflandscape patches.

2. MATERIALS and METHODS
2.1 Analysis of Space and Environment in Shenyang Lu Xun Park
Lu Xun Park is located at No.6, West Binhe Road, South of Heping District, Shenyang City,
Liaoning Province. The park covers an area of 43,000 ΃ and has a water surface area of 4,390 ΃. It isa small urban park. The park is surrounded by walls and has an artificial lake, fitness equipments, anda hill. The park is adjacent to the South Canal in the south, the old-fashioned residential quarter in thewest, Shenyang Radio and Television University and Luyuan Community in the north, and Luyuan
Community in the east, as shown in figure 1. Figure 1 – Lu Xun Park Plan Analysis
2.2Soundscape survey and soundscape map
The on-site investigation was divided into two parts, namely LAeq measurement and acoustic event
recording. The park was divided into 15m*15m grids. A convenient measurement point was selected asa measuring point at the centre of each grid, with a total of 139 effective measuring points. On a typicalworking day (May 6, 2019), data were collected in the morning, midday and evening. The surrounding
road traffic conditions and crowd characteristics in the park are shown in Table 1. 8 pre-trained
surveyors started simultaneous measurement from the starting grid at each same time period according
to a preset walking route, and ensured that all the grids in the responsible area were measured within 30
minutes. The measurement content at each grid point includes ķ1min L Aeq data (Secondary Sound
Level Meter); ĸgeographic coordinates of the measurement point (Omap APP); Ĺthe measurement
point acoustic event significant order (acoustic event significant quantity table).ArcGIS interpolation
analysis(9) was used to analyse the collected data and to construct a soundscape map.
Table 1 - Analysis of measurement period characteristics
PeriodTime

Traffic conditions

Crowd characteristics

Activity characteristics

Morning

7:30-8:00

Early peak

Mainly middle-aged

Abundant exercise

Midday11:30-12:00

platykurtic

Mainly middle-aged and a few young children

Many recreational activities

Evening

18:00-18:30

Late peak

Mainly middle-aged and a few children

More fitness activities877

2.3 Soundscape walk and subjective evaluation
The soundscape walk is a way for the listener to feel the soundscape positively andcomprehensively, namely, listen to the soundscape of each area slowly along an established route [8].
According to the landscape features, the park was divided into 7 landscape patches. 8 surveyors with abackground in relevant professions (Architecture: 4, Landscape: 4) (Shenyang Jianzhu University,
China) were divided into 4 groups each with one male and one female to avoid gender bias. 4 groups ofsurveyors took a soundscape walk in the park and performed a soundscape experience and restorativeevaluation. In order to avoid sequence effect, the four groups of surveyors used different walking
routes, two of which started from the south gate, and the other two groups started from the north of thepark, and from each gate circled the park clockwise and anticlockwise.
Within each patch, each surveyor recorded the subjective perception of the soundscape, including“relaxing feeling”, “beautiful experience”, “exploratory of connotation” and “immersion”. The
specific semantic description is shown in Table 2 (8). All the above indicators used the 5-level
semantic difference scale, and the average score of the four dimensions had been used as an indicator
to characterise the restoration quality of the patch.
Table 2 - Soundscape Restoration Rating Scale
Restorative feeling of soundscape

Semantic description

Relaxing feeling

Relaxed - nervous, gentle - stimulating

Beautiful experience

Beautiful - ugly, like - hate

Exploratory of connotation

Interesting - boring, positive - negative

Immersion

Pleasure - trouble, comfort - uncomfortable

Rating level
very strong, strong,
average, weak, veryweak

3. RESULTS
3.1

LAeq, acoustic events distribution and soundscape map

3.1.1 LAeq and distribution
The latitude and longitude of the 139 measuring points and the L Aeq of the three periods were
imported into ArcGIS, and the typical working day L Aeq distribution mapping was obtained by Inverse
Distance Way (9), as shown in figure 2.

Figure 2 – Typical working day LAeq distribution
It can be seen from the figure that the overall L Aeq in the park is large and the sound environment isnoisy. It is 45.3-73.7dB(A), 45.3-72.8 dB(A) and 45.9-73.8 dB (A) in the morning, midday andevening respectively; through variance analysis, the LAeq difference between morning and midday wasdeemed significant (0.01<P=0.021<0.05), and the difference in LAeq between morning and evening
was also significant (0.01<P=0.034<0.05).There are also differences in the distri bution of L Aeq at
different spatial locations in the same period.

878

Morning is the noisiest period of the day. LAeq in more than 52.5% area exceeded the 55 dB(A) (10)specified by the acoustic environmental quality standard. At this time, the park was greatly affected by
the early peak traffic of the external roads and, morning exercise. There were many types of activities
in the park and the active population was dense, which made the L Aeq in the morning park high. The
areas with higher L Aeq were mainly distributed on the north and southeast sides of the park. The
squares on the north side of the park were larger, and the activities of the crowds were more abundant,such as fan dance and square dance. Although the vegetation on the southeast side was dense, there
was a typical acoustic event, playing the flute, which had strong penetrating power and a large
influence range, giving rise to a relatively high LAeq .
The overall L Aeq in the midday was low, and the area with LAeq exceeding 55 dB(A) accounted for
36% of the total area. During this period, there were fewer traffic outside the park, and the traffic noise
inside the park was not obvious. Natural sound perception was more obvious. At this time, the numberof people in the park was the lowest. The crowd activities were mainly leisure and recreational, butthere were also a small number of other activities, such as playing saxophone, chorus, etc. The areas
with higher L Aeq were mainly distributed in the hard square on the north side of the park, where crowds
were more concentrated.
The overall L Aeq in the evening was slightly higher than that in the midday, slightly lower than themorning, and the area with the L Aeq exceeding 55 dB(A) was 43.9%. Due to the late peak, the traffic
was loud and the natural sound was reduced. At this time, the park mainly focused on fitness andleisure activities, such as square dance. The areas with higher L Aeq are mainly distributed on the north,west and south sides of the park with a large square. The L Aeq of the activity square on the north side
was the highest in the whole day, which peaked at 73.8 dB(A).
From the spatial distribution difference of the park L Aeq, it can be seen that there are large
differences in different spaces. There is a large square on the north side of the park, which is the main
activity area for tourists, and the crowd activities were concentrated, so the L Aeq is larger; the west sidesquare has more fitness equipment, the crowd is mostly fitness activities, L Aeq is lower than the square;
The south side of the park is adjacent to the city's secondary trunk road, which was seriously affectedby traffic noise, and the L Aeq is larger.; the east side of the park is abundant in vegetation, with notmuch open space, the crowds have less concentrated activities, and the L Aeq is lower.
3.1.2 Acoustic events and distribution
A total of 18 acoustic events were recorded in the three periods, which were classified according
to the type of sound source, as shown in Table 3. Among them, natural sounds include d birdcall,wind blowing leaves, and wind; traffic sounds included external traffic, bicycle ringtone, the two
together constituted the park background sound; the active sounds are from abundant citizens' leisureand fitness activities and included acoustic instruments sound, equipment sound, and human soundconstitute the foreground sound of the park.
Table – 3 classification of park sound events
Sound category

Specific acoustic event soundNatural soundBirdcall, wind blowing leaves, wind

Traffic soundExternal traffic, bicycle ringtone

Active soundInstrument soundsaxophone, erhu, flute

Equipment soundTable tennis, bounce ball, radio, square dance, fan dance

human soundConversation, children's play, exercise, fit walking, chorus
According to the saliency degree of the acoustic events recorded by the surveyor, the traffic
sound, natural sound, and the active sound are assigned 5-0 respectively, wherein 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0
are very significant, relatively significant, general, relatively slight respectively, very slight andalmost inaudible.
Using ArcGIS, soundscape map was constructed by the method of Kriging interpolation, as
shown in Figure 3. The traffic sound, active sound, and natural sound are represented by red, yellow
and blue. After superimposition different colors appear, which can express the different types ofsound composition and its significance in the park (11).

879

Figure 3 – Acoustic event distribution map
It can be seen from the figure that there is a large difference in the distribution of sounds in
different time periods at the same space; the distribution of sounds between different spaces at thesame period also had a large difference. From the distribution in time it can be seen that, the morning
period was the early traffic peak and crowd fitness period. The sound of the park was mainly active
sound. Traffic sound was more significant, mainly distributed in the southeast side of the park
adjacent to the urban road, and the natural sound was mainly distributed in the north side of the park,occupying less area; in the midday the park was quieter, active sounds becomes weaker, while
natural sound was strengthened and mainly distributed in the dense vegetation area on the east sideof the park. At this time, the traffic sound of the park was mainly distributed in the south side of thepark adjacent to the urban road. In the evening, there was a late traffic peak, and the active soundwas higher than that in the midday. The traffic sound was more prominent, and it is distributed on thesouth side of the park near the urban road.
From the spatial distribution it can be seen that the park was abundant in activities throughout theday, and the active sound was more obvious, distributed throughout the park; the number of birds inthe park was large, and natural sound was mainly concentrated in plant-intensive places, such as theeast side of the park; There were urban roads adjacent to three sides of the park, but there were walls
surrounding the park, making traffic sound not as obvious, mainly distributed on the south side of
the park, close to the urban roads.
3.2

Typical acoustic event perception saliency and impact surface analysis

3.2.1 Significance analysis of acoustic event perception
There are abundant active sounds in the park, as well as natural sounds and traffic sounds. The
three types of sounds together constitute the acoustic environment of the park. The 18 acoustic
events recorded by the surveyors are classified into 5-1 grades according to sound saliency, as shownin Table 4.
Table 4 – Significant analysis of acoustic events

880

Significant level classification

Acoustic event

5 levelExternal traffic, conversation, flute, saxophone, square dance, fan dance

4 levelBirdcall, chorus, Erhu

3 levelBicycle ringtone, radio sound, children's play

2 levelTable tennis, wind, and bounce ball

1 levelFit walking, wind blowing leaves

3.2.2 Typical acoustic event impact surface analysis
Different sounds have different salience and range of influence, and different impact surfaces.
According to the saliency ordering of acoustic events, the acoustic events with strong saliency, wide
transmission range, and clear vocalisation points were selected as typical acoustic events, and impact
surface analysis was performed, as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Typical acoustic event influence surface and sound source point LAeq
It can be seen from the figure that the typical acoustic event is divided into 4 categories: ķconcentrated sounds but widespread, such as playing the flute and the saxophone; ĸconcentrated
sounding and narrow transmission range, such as fan dance, table tennis, chorus; Ĺscattered sounds
but widespread such as square dance, exercise; ĺscattered sounds and spread a narrow range, such as
children’s play.
Playing the flute occured in the south side of the woods in the early morning period. Although there
were more trees in the surrounding area, due to less activity under the forest and the flute sound being
sharper, the propagation range was wider, and the LAeq of the sound source point was 66 dB(A).
Playing the saxophone occurs near the pavilion in the middle of the park. The surrounding activities
were less, the environment was wider, the sound spread was wider, and the LAeq of the sound source
point was 60.5 dB(A).
Fan dance occured on the west side of the artificial lake. The area is relatively open, and the water
surface absorbs sound strongly. Therefore, the sound had obvious debilitation in the direction of theartificial lake on the east side of the sound source point. The LAeq of the sound source point is 57.8
dB(A). The table tennis activity took place in the square on the west side of the park. Due to theenclosure of the west side wall, the sound weakness was less obvious on the west side of the soundsource point, and it was more obvious because of the water surface on the east side. The LAeq of thesound source point was 54.8 dB(A). On the west side of the chorus was a small mountain with a heightof five metres. The east side was a park wall and the south side was the entrance square. The soundshows a relatively weak performance in the direction of the wall. The LAeq of the sound source point
was 71.9 dB(A).
Square dance was mainly distributed in the square on the north side and the south side. The active
music sounds loud, the range of propagation and interference was large, and the influence surface waslarge. The L Aeq of the three sound source points was 73.8/63/60.5 dB(A) respectively. The exercise
activities were mainly distributed in the squares on the north side and the west side. The sound spreadnarrow and rapidly attenuated to the periphery. The L Aeq of the two sound source points was 69.5/56.7
dB(A) respectively.
Children's playing sounds had multiple sound source points, mainly distributed in the squares andthe artificial lake around the north. The L Aeq of the two sound source points were 48.7/48.4 dB(A)respectively.
3.3 Landscape patch soundscape recovery experience
The scores of the subjective perceptual experience of the soundscapes were tested by Kendall's
Harmony Coefficient. The Kendall’s harmony coefficient Wa=0.317, X 2 = 68.472, and the significance881

test for X 2 is 0.00<0.001. It reached a very significant level, and this shows that the 8 reviewers had ahigh level of consistency, so the average of the 8 reviewers' scores can be used as the score for the
restoration quality of each landscape patch; the scores of the subjective perception of the soundscapewere then sorted, and the total mean of the restoration quality of each landscape patch was obtained, as
shown in Figure 5. The L Aeq mean and variance of each landscape patch in the corresponding period of
subjective evaluation were calculated, as shown in Table 5.

Figure 5 – Soundscape Restoration Quality Score and Total Mean
Table 5 – LAeq mean and variance of each plaquePatchmean LAeq(dB(A))

Under

Artificial

Leisure andforestlake

recreation

50.9

53.2

50.5

Hill
52

Entrance

Fitness

Activitysquaresquaresquare

53.3

53.6

60.4

Variance
77.6
11.5
5.9
13.9
70.4
7.5
96.5
It can be seen from the figure that the total mean of the soundscape restorative quality in the patchof under forest is the highest, the total mean of the artificial water patch, the leisure and recreation area
and the hill area is higher, the entrance square and the fitness square, which were in turn higher thanthat of the activity square is the lowest.
The under forest area was densely vegetated, with beautiful scenery, abundant natural sounds, asmall number of square, and a few crowded activities. The two dimensions of “relaxing feeling” and“immersion” were higher. Although the L Aeq mean was low and the overall environment was quiet, thepatch had typical acoustic events concentrated in the source points, such as the flute, so the L Aeq
distribution was not uniform and the variance was large.
The artificial lake had less greening, less natural sound, more open water surface and no watersideactivity, so it had lower exploratory. However, due to the hydrophilicity of humans, the score washigher in the dimension of “beautiful experience”. The LAeq mean was higher and the variance waslower, indicating that the patch was relatively open, lack of occlusion of sound propagation, and L Aeq
distribution was uniform. The leisure recreation had a high vegetation coverage rate, and the naturalsound was more obvious. It mainly included activities such as fit walking with less interference, andthe area was far away from the street, and was less affected by traffic sounds. The “relaxation feeling”
dimension was higher. The L Aeq mean and variance were both low, indicating that the L Aeq was overall
low and evenly distributed. There was a large height difference in the hill, and there was a large
occlusion in the sound transmission. However, the view of the top of the hill was wide and the sceneryis beautiful. The entire park can be seen. The “relaxation feeling” dimension was high, the L Aeq mean
and the variance was low, indicating that the patch was relatively quiet.
The entrance square had low vegetation coverage, low natural sound, and there were large squares
in the patch, which carried more crowd activities, such as fitness, square dance, crowd conversations .
The patch was located near urban roads. The traffic sound was loud and the L Aeq mean was high, but
the activity of the patch was more concentrated, and there was an entrance wall, so the variance was882large. The fitness square has few plants, and there are many fitness activities, which gave people apositive feeling. Therefore, the “exploratory of connotation” was higher, but the sports equipment wasdensely distributed, the crowd activities were concentrated, and the patch lacked occlusion. Therefore,
the LAeq mean was higher and the variance was smaller.
There was little greening in the activity square area, the plant absorbed soundless, so the naturalsound was lower, the patch had a large square, public activities were more abundant, the sound was
noisier, and the was affected by surrounding traffic sound. The L Aeq mean and variance were the largest.
It showed that due to the concentrated activities in the region, the sound attenuation to the peripherywas weak, and a variety of sounds intertwined.

4. CONCLUSION
According to the statistical results of the data, it can be seen that the L Aeq of the park has different
distributions in time and space. Different acoustic events have different influence surfaces. L Aeq ,acoustic events and landscape features affect the restoration quality of the soundscape:ķ The L Aeq distribution in the park was 44.5-73.8dB(A), in which L Aeq was the highest in themorning, lowest midday, and medium in the evening, and was higher on the north side of the park. The
LAeq of the central east part was significantly lower than rest of the park. L Aeq distribution in the park
was not uniform;ĸ The sound composition of the park included abundant citizen’s activities, natural sounds andsurrounding road traffic sounds. The analysis of typical acoustic events reveal ed that different acoustic
events had characteristic differences in significance and influence surface;Ĺ According to the restoration quality scores of the landscape patches the L Aeq mean, and LAeq,
acoustic event composition and landscape features of the seven patches were different, which affected
the soundscape restorative quality.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks for the financial support from the Liaoning Province Archives Science and Technology
Project Funding, China (Contract No. L-2018-X-11)

REFERENCES
1. Kaplan R, Kaplan S. Tl1e Experience of Nature: A Psycholog1cal Perspective. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1989.
2. Kaplan S. The Urban Forest as a Source of Psychological Well-Being. In: Bradley GA(ed.). Urban
Forest Landscapes: Integrating Mult1d1sc1pl1nary Perspectives. Seattle: University of Washington
Press, 1995. p.100-108.
3. Kaplan S. A Model of Person-Environment Compatibility. Environment and Behavior, 1983(1): p.
311-332.
4. GB51192-2016, Park Design Specification.
5. Wilkie S, Clouston L. Environment preference and environment type congruence: Effects on perceived
restoration potential and restoration outcomes. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2015, 14(2):p.368-376.
6. International organization for standardization.(2014).ISO 12913-1ǣ acoustics soundscape part1:
definition and conceptual framework.
7. Analysis of City Park Soundscape on the Time Dimension. Architecture and Culture, 2016(9).
8. Zhang Yuan. Study on the recovery benefit of soundscape and the improvement of acoustic
environment quality in urban open space. New Architecture,2014(5): p.18-21.
9. Tomlinson R. Thinking About GIS: Geographic Information System Planning for Managers. Esri Press,
2003.
10. GB3096-2008.Acoustic environmental quality standard.
11. Liu Jiang, Kang Jian, Holger, Behm, Luo Tao. A Study of the Relationship between Soundscape
Perception and Urban Landscape in Urban Open Space. New Architecture2014(5): p. 40-43.

883