# Exploring the Influence of Avian Vocal Presence on Appraisal of Urban Soundscapes
## 3 Results  
We calculated objective acoustic parameters for all recordings, i.e., mean values, standard deviation, and maximum values of loudness, sharpness, roughness, and fluctuation strength. This was carried out using [PERSON]'s method [45; 46] and is shown in Tables 2-5. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Pair Number** & **Bipolar Adjective Pair** & **Pair Type** \\ \hline
1 & Monotonous–Diverse & Auditory \\ \hline
2 & Unpleasant–Pleasant & \\
3 & Artificial–Natural & \\
4 & Stressful–Soothing & Emotional \\
5 & Inconspicuous–Conspicuous & \\
6 & Rough–Gentle & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: The bipolar adjective pairs used in this study. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**Loudness (Sone)** & **Mean** & **Stand. Dev.** & **Maximum** \\ \hline Children’s Park – control group & 1.53 & 0.69 & 4.08 \\ Children’s Park Blackbird & 1.55 & 0.74 & 4.40 \\ Children’s Park + Blackcap & 2.07 & 1.06 & 5.15 \\ Children’s Park + Chaffinch & 1.55 & 0.90 & 4.39 \\ Children’s Park + Great tit & 1.93 & 0.94 & 4.66 \\ Children’s Park + Robin & 1.76 & 0.77 & 4.61 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Mean and standard deviation for loudness for each recording. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**Sharpness (Acum)** & **Mean** & **Stand. Dev** & **Maximum** \\ \hline Children’s Park – control group & 1.63 & 0.24 & 3.01 \\ Children’s Park + Blackbird & 1.63 & 0.26 & 2.87 \\ Children’s Park + Blackcap & 1.85 & 0.32 & 2.86 \\ Children’s Park + Chaffinch & 1.72 & 0.31 & 2.87 \\ Children’s Park + Great tit & 2.01 & 0.46 & 2.89 \\ Children’s Park + Robin & 1.98 & 0.38 & 3.19 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Mean and standard deviation for sharpness for each recording. In addition to tables, Figure 14 shows the loudness analysis for a children's park, which was reproduced to a control group (marked with black color), and for the recording of a children's park together with the sound of the blackcap, which was played back to one of the experimental groups (marked with red color). We compared these two recordings since they showed the \"biggest\" difference in mean and maximum values of loudness. A direct analysis of the obtained listeners' responses based on the descriptive marks is shown in Table 6. For each considered acoustic environment, the mean value of response (x), the standard deviation of the sample (\(\sigma\)), and its square, i.e., the variance (\(\sigma^{2}\)), was calculated. Figure 15 shows the comparison of mean values for each bipolar adjective pair and every deemed recording. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Roughness (Asper)** & **Mean** & **Stand. Dev** & **Maximum** \\ \hline Children’s Park – control group & 0.05 & 0.033 & 0.39 \\ Children’s Park + Blackbird & 0.079 & 0.039 & 0.82 \\ Children’s Park + Blackcap & 0.067 & 0.035 & 0.67 \\ Children’s Park + Chaffinch & 0.042 & 0.034 & 0.54 \\ Children’s Park + Great tit & 0.012 & 0.008 & 0.10 \\ Children’s Park + Robin & 0.015 & 0.011 & 0.13 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Mean and standard deviation for roughness for each recording. Figure 14: Loudness analysis for the recording of the children’s park (marked black) and blackcap (marked red). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Fluctuation Strength (Vacil)** & **Mean** & **Stand. Dev** & **Maximum** \\ \hline Children’s Park – control group & 0.048 & 0.019 & 0.11 \\ Children’s Park + Blackbird & 0.138 & 0.046 & 0.36 \\ Children’s Park + Blackcap & 0.048 & 0.015 & 0.09 \\ Children’s Park + Chaffinch & 0.051 & 0.015 & 0.09 \\ Children’s Park + Great tit & 0.051 & 0.015 & 0.1 \\ Children’s Park + Robin & 0.168 & 0.050 & 0.36 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Mean and standard deviation for fluctuation strength for each recording. As observed above by direct analysis, differences in average ratings exist between the control and experimental groups for each pair of bipolar attributes, but different attribute pairs generated diverse differences.