Studies of Noise
A It is not difficult for people to encounter sound at levels capable of harming their health. During an ordinary day, someone living in a typical urban environment may experience a wide range of sounds in streets, shopping centres, schools, workplaces, recreational facilities and the home. Even locations that were once quiet have become affected by noise, making it increasingly difficult to escape unwanted sound completely.
In its 1999 Guidelines for Community Noise, the World Health Organisation reported that noise-induced hearing impairment was the world’s most prevalent irreversible occupational hazard and estimated that 120 million people had disabling hearing difficulties. Evidence also indicates that excessive noise can produce numerous other adverse health effects.
Mark Stephenson, a senior research audiologist at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, explains that his organisation defines hazardous occupational noise as sound exceeding a time-weighted average of 85 dBA over a normal eight-hour working day. Different measurements and definitions may be used in other circumstances.
B According to NIOSH, approximately 30 million workers in the United States are exposed to hazardous sound levels at work. Industries with particularly large numbers of exposed employees include construction, agriculture, mining, manufacturing, utilities, transportation and the military.
Craig Moulton, a senior industrial hygienist with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, acknowledges that monitoring noise throughout American industry is extremely difficult. Nevertheless, he explains that employers whose workers are overexposed to noise are required to protect them from its harmful effects. Employers must also establish an effective and continuing hearing-conservation programme in accordance with occupational noise regulations.
C Numerous scientific studies have confirmed that exposure to certain sound levels can damage hearing. Prolonged exposure may alter the structure of the delicate hair cells in the inner ear, resulting in permanent hearing loss. It can also cause tinnitus, which may be experienced as ringing, roaring, buzzing or clicking in the ears.
NIOSH research conducted during the mid- to late 1990s found that approximately 90 per cent of coal miners had some degree of hearing impairment by the age of 52, compared with only 9 per cent of the general population. The research also indicated that, by the age of 25, the average carpenter’s hearing could be equivalent to that of an otherwise healthy 50-year-old man who had not been occupationally exposed to noise.
William Luxford, medical director of the House Ear Clinic at St Vincent Medical Center in Los Angeles, points to one encouraging fact. Continued exposure causes hearing loss to progress, but once the exposure ends, the deterioration also stops. A change in a person’s environment can therefore prevent further damage and improve that individual’s prospects for maintaining healthy hearing.
In 2001, researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported the results of audiometric tests involving 5,249 children. They estimated that 12.5 per cent of American children had noise-induced hearing-threshold shifts—sometimes described as dulled hearing—in one or both ears. Most of the affected children had only limited damage. However, continued exposure to excessive noise could eventually cause difficulty with high-frequency sound discrimination. Potentially harmful sources included loud music, concerts, certain toys, lawnmowers and fireworks.
D The effects of noise do not end with the ears. Non-auditory effects are physical or psychological changes that do not involve hearing loss but can nevertheless be measured. These may include raised blood pressure, interrupted sleep, an increased heart rate, cardiovascular constriction, laboured breathing and changes in brain chemistry.
Such effects were being investigated as early as 1930. In a study published by E. L. Smith and D. L. Laird, exposure to noise was found to cause stomach contractions in healthy adults. Later research into the non-auditory consequences of noise has produced results that are sometimes contradictory or controversial.
Noise can also interfere with learning. In 1975, psychologist Arline Bronzaft collaborated on a study involving children attending a school beside an elevated railway line. Half of the pupils studied were taught in classrooms facing the railway, while the remainder were in classrooms in a quieter part of the building. Children on the quiet side performed better in reading tests; by the sixth grade, they were approximately one academic year ahead of pupils taught in the noisier rooms.
Bronzaft and the school principal subsequently persuaded the education authorities to install sound-absorbing acoustic tiles in the classrooms beside the railway. The Transit Authority also modified the nearby track to reduce the amount of noise it produced. A follow-up study published in 1981 found that the children’s reading scores improved after these measures had been introduced.
E Campaigners against noise argue that Europe and several Asian countries are more advanced than the United States in dealing with the problem. Population pressure encouraged European authorities to respond more quickly. In the European Union, cities with populations of at least 250,000 began producing noise maps to help decision-makers develop noise-pollution policies. Paris was among the first cities to complete such maps.
The information shown on the maps could be entered into computer models to predict the likely acoustic consequences of proposed street designs or new buildings before construction began. The maps were therefore intended not merely to record existing noise but also to support future planning decisions.
Some campaigners have called for a stronger government body with greater power to regulate noise. Other experts argue that regulation alone is not sufficient. Bronzaft believes governments around the world should devote more money to noise research and coordinate their efforts more effectively. This would allow health and environmental policies to be founded on reliable scientific evidence.
Farmers
An iconic chain store in New Zealand reaches a milestone
A The chain of stores known as Farmers began one hundred years ago as a mail order company. Today, the Farmers chain employs 3,500 staff across 58 branches, making it the most venerable institution of its type in New Zealand.
‘Coming to Farmers once a week has become woven into the fabric of New Zealand culture,’ says business historian Ian Hunter. By 1960, one in every ten people had an account with the company. It was not only a shop but also hosted the largest annual parade in the country—the Santa Parade—each Christmas.
Gary Blumenthal, whose family have been customers for three generations, understands well the role Farmers has played in New Zealand culture. ‘We were on holiday in Auckland,’ he explains, ‘and I decided that the lookout tower on top of the Farmers building would be a unique place to fit the ring on my new fiancée’s finger.’ The couple has been married for 50 years.
B Farmers’ longevity can be attributed to the philosophy fostered by Robert Laidlaw, the Scottish immigrant who established the business. Right from the outset, Laidlaw guaranteed customer satisfaction, and those who were not entirely happy with a purchase would receive a full refund, with no questions asked. This was certainly the first time such a guarantee had been made by a New Zealand retailer and was probably one of the first worldwide. Laidlaw believed that the scheme could work if he ensured that every product sold was of the highest quality relative to its price.
C Another important aspect of the Farmers’ philosophy was to internationalise the New Zealand market. By the time the Hobson Street store opened in 1920 to sell directly to customers for the first time, Laidlaw had established buying offices in New York and London so as to offer his customers the latest designs. This was a bold move in those days and won Farmers a devoted following.
It is also true that whoever you speak to about Farmers in the early years—whether managers or workers—emphasises how the company represented a large family. Everyone employed by Laidlaw felt that they were building something that would ultimately benefit the whole country.
For example, to mark the centenary celebrations, Farmers’ 58 stores around the country announced the neighbourhood charities for which they would raise funds. Organisations ranging from guide-dog services to volunteer fire brigades would benefit.
D Farmers has always had a heart, according to former board chairman Rawdon Busfield. ‘One day, I was in the Hobson Street store and a woman came in with two small children—they didn’t have a lot of money, you could tell. That week, we had a special on: a big bar of chocolate for a shilling. But the boy only had a penny. I took the penny and gave him the chocolate.’
However, not everything has stayed the same. Farmers was once home to genteel tearooms, children’s playgrounds and an annual sale to celebrate the birthday of Hector the Parrot—who came to embody the store in the eyes of many shoppers and who died, aged 131, in the 1970s. You could buy houses from Farmers, and its saddle factory supplied the armed forces. In fact, although the company has grown considerably over the years, today it sells a narrower assortment of products than in the past.
E Walk through a Farmers store today and you will see big changes. Its most recent branch, in the suburb of Albany, is filled with bright lights and big brands. The branch sells cosmetics from 16 different international companies and buys from approximately 500 suppliers, of which about 30 per cent are locally owned.
‘Eight or ten years ago,’ says current chief executive Rod McDermott, ‘lots of brands wouldn’t partner with us. We weren’t in trouble as such, but we could have been doing much better because we were focused too much on price and not on fashion. The reorientation of the last decade has seen a great improvement.’
F Farmers almost did not pull through one economic crisis. In the mid-1980s, business was booming, and the company had stores throughout the country. Then, with sales topping $375 million, it was taken over by Chase Corporation.
Lincoln Laidlaw, the son of the company’s founder, remembers the dark days following the stock-market crash of 1987 and the collapse of Chase Corporation. ‘The business was being divided up,’ he says, ‘and I believe that the original culture of the store was dispelled and it hasn’t been recovered. That’s a shame, but the business is still strong.’
For a few turbulent years, the stores were controlled first by a consortium of Australian banks and later by a local corporation. In 2003, Farmers returned to ‘family’ ownership when it was purchased by the James Pascoe Group, which is owned by an established New Zealand retail family.
Brand power has made Farmers profitable again, according to McDermott. ‘And now we’re becoming the brand we used to be. It’s like the rebirth of an icon.’
First Memories
Psychologist Richard Worrington reviews research into our earliest memories.
People have sometimes told me they dread the question, ‘What is your earliest memory?’ Perhaps they find the whole notion too simplistic, like being asked to name a favourite film or book, when the choice is almost limitless. But we should welcome enquiries about our first memories—it is a compliment if others are interested in our lives and experiences. Besides that, the human memory is a fascinating area of study. Research shows that some subjects can provide rich details of a first memory very quickly while others struggle to come up with anything at all. Their range of memories is also predictably diverse, from holidays and injuries to routine activities such as walking in the park or having a family meal. Most studies show that around 25% of first memories are of a negative event, while nearly double that proportion are positive, and these findings are constant regardless of the subjects’ ages or backgrounds.
Historically, the topic of human memory in general most certainly attracted a great deal of scholarly attention. But our earliest memories were largely overlooked by researchers, which turns out to have been an important omission. Scientists developed a reasonable understanding of what we now call ‘semantic memory’, which is the ability to recall what might loosely be called data, such as dates, times or places in which a particular incident occurred. In general terms, semantic memory is fixed and static. However, there are other forms of memory, which collectively I call ‘subjective memories’, and these are much more fluid. For example, numerous experiments studying the memories held by witnesses to an event have shown conclusively that recollections of what happened can vary dramatically between individuals, and even in the same person over time. Our earliest memories are another example of subjective memory.
So what do we know about when, why and how our earliest memories form? Scientists today recognise what has been termed ‘childhood amnesia’. This is the finding that babies and toddlers do not form lasting memories. For the majority of adults, their earliest memories begin once the period of childhood amnesia has come to an end, at about three and a half years of age. These are the memories that will endure for the rest of their lives. However, beyond that fixed starting point much variation exists. For example, one study found that the earliest memories of American children were more likely to feature solitary play or events where they were the central character. Asian children, in contrast, tended to remember family or school events in which they might have played no central role. Based on the assumption that American society places greater emphasis on individualism, this implies that earliest memories are influenced by social priorities.
Another important idea is that of ‘autobiographical memory’. This is the concept that many people construct a narrative of their lives and select memories that contribute most forcefully to that narrative. This seems to be relevant to our earliest memories in the following sense. Once people reach maturity, they often develop a strong feeling of who they are, perhaps based on their chosen line of work or their interests. Studies show that, for example, the earliest memories of an accomplished sportswoman were of herself as a child athlete, whereas a chef recalled preparing a meal as a young boy. Thus, who we are now appears to have some bearing on what we choose to recall from long ago.
A picture is emerging, then, of the unreliability of our earliest memories. Certainly, studies show that some earliest memories are simply made up. However, these seem to be a small minority. Much more common is that our earliest memories may be pieced together from different elements of reality. They may feature an item that we do remember from our childhood, such as a pram or toy, but embellished in some way to include a larger event. Or they may feature information that actually comes from a photograph, a family story, a memory that we’ve heard from somebody else, or some combination of all of these. Research shows that some memories stand out from the rest as much clearer and more colourful. These are usually formed during what’s known as the ‘reminiscence bump’, which occurs between the ages of 16 and 25. But even these memories are no less likely to be created.
In fact, research shows that only so-called ‘flashbulb memories’ are likely to be completely true. These are memories that derive from events about which we have particularly strong feelings, perhaps of intense sadness or happiness. But most of our other early memories are, at least to some extent, chosen by us. The question is, though, does this really matter? They are still much-loved memories and perhaps we can learn about ourselves from them. Often these memories are strong indicators of who we are, or would like to be, and exchanging first memories with others fosters connection and intimacy. Such factors represent important elements of our humanity, whether or not the memory itself is completely accurate.