## 4 Results and Discussion
### Quality of the Sonic Environment  
As could be expected on the basis of the known relationship between hearing particular sounds and overall quality judgment of the sonic environment and the results discussed in Section 4.2, statistically significant trends are found between relative adherence to tranquility viewpoints and judgment of the quality of the sonic environment. Indeed, the last column of Table 2 shows a statistically significant negative correlation coefficient between relative membership to the tranquility viewpoint groups \"Natural sound sources\" and \"Silence\" and the judgment of the overall quality of the sound environment. Thus, persons adhering to these tranquility viewpoints judge the quality of the sonic environment worse. Although these statistically significant trends as a function of the appraisal of the sonic environment highlight the effect of relative membership to the tranquility viewpoints \"Natural sound sources\" and \"Silence\" on this appraisal, it is also useful to study the difference between membership of tranquility viewpoints within each of the five sonic environment quality judgment groups. A statistically significant difference determined by one-way ANOVA between tranquility groups was observed within several categories of the overall quality appraisal of the sonic environment. The difference was found for the responses: \"very bad\" (\(F\)(2,30) = 6.147, \(p\) = 0.006), \"bad\" (\(F\)(2,162) = 3.373, \(p\) = 0.037), \"neither good, nor bad\" (\(F\)(2,366) = 4.353, \(p\) = 0.014) and \"very good\" (\(F\)(2,273) = 3.107, \(p\) = 0.046). For the responses \"neither good, nor bad\" and \"very good\", results \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Question:** & **Human Sounds** & **Natural Sounds** & **Mechanical Sounds** & **Sound Environment** \\ \hline
**Tranquility Group** & & & & \\ \hline Social relationships & \(\tau_{b}=0.066\) & \(\tau_{b}=0.008\) & \(\tau_{b}=-0.048\) & \(\tau_{b}=0.072\) \\  & \(p=0.011\) & \(p=0.747\) & \(p=0.066\) & \(p=0.006\) \\ \hline Natural sound sources & \(\tau_{b}=0.000\) & \(\tau_{b}=-0.118\) & \(\tau_{b}=0.114\) & \(\tau_{b}=-0.130\) \\  & \(p=0.998\) & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) \\ \hline Silence & \(\tau_{b}=-0.060\) & \(\tau_{b}=-0.073\) & \(\tau_{b}=0.106\) & \(\tau_{b}=-0.142\) \\  & \(p=0.022\) & \(p=0.005\) & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Rank correlation coefficients with significance values between participants’ responses to questions on hearing sounds (human, natural and mechanical) and belonging to a specific tranquility group. In the last column, the same is shown for the question on the quality of the sonic environment. from Tukey post hoc tests revealed that the difference is statistically significant only between the tranquility groups \"Silence\" and \"Social relationships\" (with Tukey test significance levels of \(p=0.011\) for the response \"neither good, nor bad\", and \(p=0.041\) for the response \"very good\"). Furthermore, Tukey tests showed that the response \"very bad\" had a statistically significant difference between the groups \"Natural sound sources\" and \"Social relationships\" (\(p=0.025\)) as well as between the groups \"Silence\" and \"Social relationships\" (\(p=0.007\)). For the response \"bad\", no statistically significant result was found with the post hoc test. The questionnaire also asked about the degree to which the sounds that people heard while visiting a park matched their expectations (Section 3.4). The Kendal correlation coefficient shows no statistically significant correlation between reported matching expectations and the relative membership to the \"Social relationships\" tranquility group. There is, however, a statistically significant negative correlation between the degree of matching of the sounds that people heard with their expectations and the relative membership to tranquility group \"Natural sounds sources\" (\(\tau_{b}=-0.121\), \(p<0.001\)) and \"Silence\" (\(\tau_{b}=-0.109\), \(p<0.001\)).