Why should eventfulness be replaced with arousal in the Perceived Affective Quality Scale for soundscape research?

The two attributes "eventful" and "uneventful" are proposed for those evaluating the perceived affective qualities of soundscapes in ISO/TS 12913-2. In this paper, from two points of view, the reasons why those attributes should be replaced with those regarding arousal are discussed. From the viewpoint of psychology, affective quality is defined as the ability to cause a change in core affect and, therefore, can be describable in terms of the same two dimensions as core affect. On the other hand, "eventful" and "uneventful" are not affective but cognitive attributes. It is a theoretical mistake to term different dimensional attributes as affective ones. From the viewpoint of translatability, the Japanese-translated word for "uneventful" cannot be distinguished from those for "calm." This fact suggests that at least one culture exists in which the semantic difference between "uneventful" and "calm" is not essential. For those in a culture where the semantic difference between two attributes is not essential, it is natural that the evaluation using those attributes is also inessential. The scales proposed in the international standards should be meaningful beyond the cultures. From this perspective, we can say that "uneventful" is not the appropriate attribute for using ISO standards.