June 21, 2012 at 15:44Noise is useful in creative tasks.
It is generally accepted that in order to maximally efficiently solve complex creative tasks that require concentration and immersion in the “stream”, a quiet, isolated place is best suited. In the article “Is Noise Always Disturbing?” A Study of the Impact of Ambient Noise on Creative Thinking ”( PDF ), published in the Journal of Consumer Research , provides experimental results that refute this claim.
Scientists conducted a series of tests to solve creative problems, dividing the participants into several groups, each of which performed tasks in different acoustic conditions - with low (50 dB), medium (70 dB) and high (85 dB) noise levels. As a noise source, a mixture of audio recordings of ambient noise in a cafe, traffic and remote construction was used. 50 dB corresponds to a quiet conversation or a quiet street, 70 to loud conversations at a short distance, a busy street, 85 to a very noisy multi-lane trunk, loud screams. It turned out that the quality of solving problems in moderate noise is noticeably higher than in quiet or too loud conditions. With a loud noise, everything is clear - 85 decibels make it impossible to concentrate and cause too much discomfort - the participants sought to finish the task as quickly as possible, to stop the “torture” and didn't really care about the quality of the decisions. But why did groups working in relative silence show poor results?
It turns out that too comfortable conditions also inhibit creative thinking, as well as too uncomfortable. The average noise level caused mild stress in the subjects and, most importantly, made their thinking less “fluent” and stereotyped. In conditions of complete comfort, the thought rolls along the track, while constant sound stimuli make the train of thought less smooth and predictable. The most comfortable conditions are not at all the most productive. In order to stimulate creativity, it can be useful to get out of a quiet office to the nearest cafe or a noisy open-space. At first glance, this contradicts the facts cited in the classic book by Tom Demarco and Timothy Lister "The Human Factor ".
However, this contradiction is only apparent. First, Demarco and Lister did not measure the noise level in offices and offices, they made assumptions about the situation in the workplace based on subjective questionnaires and indirect factors, such as the layout and density of the office’s “population”. Naturally, those who were not at all happy with their work for any reason tended to complain more about noise, while those who worked with pleasure could simply not pay attention to it. Secondly, they investigated more likely the totality of all environmental factors, including not only noise, but the area per employee, the presence of windows, distractions and interruptions.
Most likely, the latter affects the performance worst of all - phone calls, colleagues' calls knock out of the stream much more than extraneous sounds. In an experiment with different noise levels, the sound source was the speakers, and the sounds were impersonal - no one pulled or interrupted the participants. So, judging by everything, the first place in the nomination “the best workplace for finding non-standard solutions” should be awarded to coffee houses and eateries - unlike the general office, when strangers around there are no one to distract you with questions or call for a smoke break. However, as an option, you can try to quietly get into someone else's office ...
Scientists conducted a series of tests to solve creative problems, dividing the participants into several groups, each of which performed tasks in different acoustic conditions - with low (50 dB), medium (70 dB) and high (85 dB) noise levels. As a noise source, a mixture of audio recordings of ambient noise in a cafe, traffic and remote construction was used. 50 dB corresponds to a quiet conversation or a quiet street, 70 to loud conversations at a short distance, a busy street, 85 to a very noisy multi-lane trunk, loud screams. It turned out that the quality of solving problems in moderate noise is noticeably higher than in quiet or too loud conditions. With a loud noise, everything is clear - 85 decibels make it impossible to concentrate and cause too much discomfort - the participants sought to finish the task as quickly as possible, to stop the “torture” and didn't really care about the quality of the decisions. But why did groups working in relative silence show poor results?
It turns out that too comfortable conditions also inhibit creative thinking, as well as too uncomfortable. The average noise level caused mild stress in the subjects and, most importantly, made their thinking less “fluent” and stereotyped. In conditions of complete comfort, the thought rolls along the track, while constant sound stimuli make the train of thought less smooth and predictable. The most comfortable conditions are not at all the most productive. In order to stimulate creativity, it can be useful to get out of a quiet office to the nearest cafe or a noisy open-space. At first glance, this contradicts the facts cited in the classic book by Tom Demarco and Timothy Lister "The Human Factor ".
However, this contradiction is only apparent. First, Demarco and Lister did not measure the noise level in offices and offices, they made assumptions about the situation in the workplace based on subjective questionnaires and indirect factors, such as the layout and density of the office’s “population”. Naturally, those who were not at all happy with their work for any reason tended to complain more about noise, while those who worked with pleasure could simply not pay attention to it. Secondly, they investigated more likely the totality of all environmental factors, including not only noise, but the area per employee, the presence of windows, distractions and interruptions.
Most likely, the latter affects the performance worst of all - phone calls, colleagues' calls knock out of the stream much more than extraneous sounds. In an experiment with different noise levels, the sound source was the speakers, and the sounds were impersonal - no one pulled or interrupted the participants. So, judging by everything, the first place in the nomination “the best workplace for finding non-standard solutions” should be awarded to coffee houses and eateries - unlike the general office, when strangers around there are no one to distract you with questions or call for a smoke break. However, as an option, you can try to quietly get into someone else's office ...