Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articoli Scientifici

V. 50 N. 1 (2026)

Confronto della percezione del soundscape in campo e in laboratorio: uno studio su due siti a Torino

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ria2026oa22151
Inviata
28 febbraio 2026
Pubblicato
29-06-2026

Abstract

Nel corso degli ultimi vent'anni, le riproduzioni in laboratorio del soundscape sono state studiate estensivamente. Tecnologie come visori per realtà virtuale (RV) e audio Ambisonics hanno permesso alle passeggiate sonore virtuali il raggiungimento di livelli accettabili di validità ecologica. Tuttavia, l'impatto percettivo di sistemi di riproduzione audio-video immersivi ad alta fedeltà necessita ancora di una valutazione sistematica. Usando una riproduzione audio in Ambisonics del terzo ordine e video a 360 gradi riprodotti su visore per RV, questo studio ha comparato la percezione del soundscape in campo e in condizioni di laboratorio in due siti scelti nella città di Torino. I descrittori psicoacustici oggettivi sono risultati stabili nel corso delle fasi sperimentali, indicando una accurata riproduzione dell'ambiente acustico. Tuttavia, deviazioni significative nei responsi percettivi sono state osservate per uno dei due siti, evidenziando l'influenza di fattori contestuali e psicologici nella valutazione soggettiva del soundscape.

Riferimenti bibliografici (comprensivi di DOI)

  1. Michael Southworth, The Sonic Environment of Cities, Environment and Behavior 1 (1969) 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391656900100104.
  2. R.M. Schafer, The Tuning of the World, Random House Inc, New York, 1977.
  3. J. Kang, F. Aletta, T.T. Gjestland, L.A. Brown, D. Bottel-dooren, B. Schulte-Fortkamp, P. Lercher, I. Van Kamp, K. Genuit, A. Fiebig, J.L. Bento Coelho, L. Maffei, L. La-via, Ten questions on the soundscapes of the built envi-ronment, Building and Environment 108 (2016) 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.08.011.
  4. J. Kang, Soundscape: Progress in the past 50 years and challenges in the next 50 years, Inter Noise 263 (2021) 132–139. https://doi.org/10.3397/IN-2021-1302.
  5. L. Jiang, A. Bristow, J. Kang, F. Aletta, R. Thomas, H. Not-ley, A. Thomas, J. Nellthorp, Ten questions concerning soundscape valuation, Building and Environment 219 (2022) 109231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109231.
  6. J. Kang, Soundscape in city and built environment: cur-rent developments and design potentials, City Built En-viro 1 (2023) 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44213-022-00005-6.
  7. Acoustics — Soundscape — Part 1: Definition and con-ceptual framework, (2014).
  8. C. Guastavino, B.F.G. Katz, J.-D. Polack, D.J. Levitin, D. Dubois, Ecological Validity of Soundscape Reproduction, (2004).
  9. L. Maffei, M. Masullo, A. Pascale, G. Ruggiero, V.P. Romero, Immersive virtual reality in community plan-ning: Acoustic and visual congruence of simulated vs re-al world, Sustainable Cities and Society 27 (2016) 338–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.06.022.
  10. J.Y. Hong, B. Lam, Z.-T. Ong, K. Ooi, W.-S. Gan, J. Kang, J. Feng, S.-T. Tan, Quality assessment of acoustic envi-ronment reproduction methods for cinematic virtual reality in soundscape applications, Building and Envi-ronment 149 (2019) 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.12.004.
  11. H.I. Jo, J.Y. Jeon, Perception of urban soundscape and landscape using different visual environment reproduc-tion methods in virtual reality, Applied Acoustics 186 (2022) 108498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2021.108498.
  12. Y. Lu, S.-K. Lau, The ecological validity of laboratory ex-periments in soundscape and landscape research: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Applied Acoustics 232 (2025) 110582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2025.110582.
  13. M. Yang, A. Heimes, M. Vorländer, B. Schulte-Fortkamp, Comparison of subjective evaluations in vir-tual and real environments for soundscape research, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 155 (2024) 3715–3729. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0026123.
  14. C. Tarlao, J. Steffens, C. Guastavino, Investigating con-textual influences on urban soundscape evaluations with structural equation modeling, Building and Envi-ronment 188 (2021) 107490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107490.
  15. W.J. Davies, N.S. Bruce, J.E. Murphy, Soundscape Re-production and Synthesis, Acta Acustica United with Acustica 100 (2014) 285–292. https://doi.org/10.3813/AAA.918708.
  16. Y. Lu, S.-K. Lau, Examining the ecological validity of VR experiments in soundscape and landscape research, Computers in Human Behavior 162 (2025) 108462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108462.
  17. D. Galati, R. Sciaky, The representation of antecedents of emotions in Northern and Southern Italy: A textual analysis, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 26 (1995) 123–140.
  18. Plogue Art et Technologie, Inc., Bidule, (2025). https://www.plogue.com/products/bidule.html (ac-cessed February 14, 2026).
  19. A. Mitchell, T. Oberman, F. Aletta, M. Erfanian, M. Ka-chlicka, M. Lionello, J. Kang, The Soundscape Indices (SSID) Protocol: A Method for Urban Soundscape Sur-veys—Questionnaires with Acoustical and Contextual Information, Applied Sciences 10 (2020) 2397. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10072397.
  20. Blackmagic Design, DaVinci Resolve, (2024). https://www.blackmagicdesign.com (accessed Febru-ary 24, 2026).
  21. Epic Games, Unreal Engine, (2023). https://www.unrealengine.com/ (accessed February 15, 2026).
  22. H. Fastl, E. Zwicker, Psychoacoustics: Facts and Models, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68888-4.
  23. Acoustics — Soundscape — Part 2: Data collection and reporting requirements, (2018).
  24. Acoustics — Soundscape — Part 3: Data analysis, (2019).
  25. A. Mitchell, F. Aletta, J. Kang, How to analyse and rep-resent quantitative soundscape data, JASA Express Let-ters 2 (2022) 037201. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0009794.
  26. Q. Meng, J. Kang, Effect of sound-related activities on human behaviours and acoustic comfort in urban open spaces, Science of The Total Environment 573 (2016) 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.130.
  27. X. Fang, T. Gao, M. Hedblom, N. Xu, Y. Xiang, M. Hu, Y. Chen, L. Qiu, Soundscape Perceptions and Preferences for Different Groups of Users in Urban Recreational Forest Parks, Forests 12 (2021) 468. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12040468.
  28. A. Mitchell, M. Erfanian, C. Soelistyo, T. Oberman, J. Kang, R. Aldridge, J.-H. Xue, F. Aletta, Effects of Sound-scape Complexity on Urban Noise Annoyance Ratings: A Large-Scale Online Listening Experiment, IJERPH 19 (2022) 14872. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214872.
  29. E. Mainardi Peron, S. Falchero, Ambiente e conoscenza. Aspetti cognitivi della psicologia ambientale, Carocci, 1994.
  30. F. Aletta, T. Oberman, A. Mitchell, M. Erfanian, J. Kang, Soundscape experience of public spaces in different world regions: A comparison between the European and Chinese contexts via a large-scale on-site survey, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 154 (2023) 1710–1734. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0020842.