What comfort distance and distraction distance actually measure
Both numbers come from the same measurement approach, defined in the ISO 3382-3 standard for open-plan offices. A loudspeaker plays speech-like sound, and technicians track how the sound level drops as they move away. Distraction distance is the distance at which speech stops being intelligible enough to distract a listener; comfort distance is the distance at which normal speech falls below 45 decibels, roughly the level at which it stops being an annoyance [3].
Comfort distance is newer and is built from two other quantities: the speech level at 4 meters and the rate at which speech decays with distance. In a survey of 185 offices, comfort distances ranged from about 3 meters, where speech fades quickly, to about 30 meters, where it carries far [3]. A short comfort distance means a quieter-feeling office in principle, but the measure describes the room's acoustics, not whether occupants actually feel disturbed.
Why distraction distance connects to annoyance, and where the link weakens
Distraction distance matters because overheard speech is a leading complaint in open-plan offices. If intelligible speech carries far, more people are within range of conversations they can follow but do not want to, which is the kind of noise that pulls attention away from work. An analysis of 21 open-plan offices found that distraction distance predicted perceived disturbance by noise, supporting the idea that this acoustic measure captures something occupants actually experience [1].
The connection is not airtight. A 2025 study of 28 offices and 349 occupants modeled overall acoustic dissatisfaction and found that sound-level metrics based on how speech decays, rather than distraction distance, were the better predictors [2]. That study also found that a lack of privacy contributed more to dissatisfaction than noise disturbance itself, about 25 percent more. The authors note the contradiction with earlier work may partly reflect their cross-sectional design, which captures offices at one point in time rather than tracking change [2]. So distraction distance appears useful but not sufficient on its own.
What else shapes whether noise bothers people
Perceived disturbance is not just a function of acoustics. A questionnaire study of open-plan offices found that how noise is perceived depends on the type of open-plan office, and that noise is a major source of discomfort and disturbance across a heterogeneous range of layouts [4]. That means two offices with similar measured distances can produce different levels of complaint depending on how the space is organized and used.
Room design details also shift the acoustic numbers themselves. A modeling study found that connected or coupled rooms, common in open-plan offices, can improve speech decay, and the effect depends on the size of the opening, the volume ratio between spaces, the sound absorption, and where the opening sits [5]. Because these features change distraction and comfort distances, they also change how well those distances track what occupants report.
How much should you trust these numbers?
The honest answer is that both distances are useful screening tools rather than reliable stand-ins for occupant experience. Distraction distance has direct support as a predictor of perceived disturbance in one multi-office analysis [1], but a larger recent model found it weaker than simpler sound-level measures [2]. Comfort distance, meanwhile, has been characterized across many offices and proposed for classification, but the studies describing it do not test it against occupants' perceived disturbance [3].
The disagreement between studies is itself informative. It suggests that which acoustic metric wins depends on the outcome being modeled, whether that is general noise disturbance, lack of privacy, or overall acoustic dissatisfaction, and on the study design. For a practical reader, the takeaway is to treat a short distraction or comfort distance as a sign of a quieter office, while recognizing that layout, privacy, and office type can matter as much as the measured distance [2][4].
Sources used in this answer
Distraction distance and perceived disturbance by noise—An analysis of 21 open-plan offices
An analysis of 21 open-plan offices found that distraction distance predicts perceived disturbance by noise.
Noise disturbance and lack of privacy: Modeling acoustic dissatisfaction in open-plan offices
In a model of 28 offices and 349 occupants, sound-level decay metrics predicted acoustic dissatisfaction better than distraction distance, and lack of privacy contributed more than noise disturbance.
Comfort Distance—A Single-Number Quantity Describing Spatial Attenuation in Open-Plan Offices
Comfort distance, the distance at which normal speech falls below 45 dB, ranged from about 3 to 30 meters across 185 offices and was proposed as a single-number acoustic classification quantity.
Effect of noise on comfort in open-plan offices: application of an assessment questionnaire
A questionnaire study found that noise is a major source of discomfort and disturbance in open-plan offices and that how noise is perceived depends on the type of open-plan office.
Effects of coupled room on the speech spatial decay of open-plan offices
A ray-tracing model found that coupled rooms can improve speech spatial decay in open-plan offices, with effects depending on opening ratio, volume ratio, absorption, and opening position.