@article{ref1,
title="Optimizing emergency awakening to audible smoke alarms: An update",
journal="Human factors",
year="2007",
author="Bruck, D. and Ball, Michael",
volume="49",
number="4",
pages="585-601",
abstract="OBJECTIVE: This review examines research on arousal from sleep in an emergency. It considers whether the current smoke alarm signal is optimal for waking those most at risk of dying in a fire and, if not, how it may be improved. BACKGROUND: The fire fatality rate during the sleeping period is approximately three times greater than at other times. METHOD: Four key areas are reviewed: (a) the characteristics of four signals (high-frequency beeping, Temporal 3, voice, and naturalistic sounds); (b) how human characteristics alter arousal to different signals; (c) research comparing the effectiveness of different alarms in different sleeping populations; and (d) acoustical, methodological, and theoretical implications. RESULTS: Significant risk factors for staying asleep include high levels of background noise, being a heavy sleeper, sleep deprivation, being a child, hypnotics, alcohol intoxication, and hearing impairment. The high-frequency beeping signal was significantly less effective than either a voice alarm or mixed-frequency beeping in waking selected at-risk groups. CONCLUSION: The alternative signals were more effective in arousing various groups of sleepers than was the high-frequency signal currently used in smoke alarms. APPLICATION: Replacement of the current smoke alarm signal with one of a lower frequency is likely to wake more people more quickly and save lives.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0018-7208",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}