Dataset Information

The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it?

ABSTRACT: Nature interactions have been demonstrated to produce reliable affective benefits. While adults demonstrate strong preferences for natural environments over urban ones, it is not clear whether these affective benefits result from exposure to nature stimuli per se, or result from viewing a highly preferred stimulus. In one set of studies (Study 1 and 2), state affect before and after image viewing was examined as a function of both preference level (high, low, very high, or very low aesthetic value) and environment type (nature or urban). When aesthetic value was matched, no differences in affect change were found between environments. However, affect change was predicted by individual participants' ratings for the images. The largest affective benefits occurred after viewing very high aesthetic nature images, but Study 2 lacked an equivalently preferred urban image set. In a second set of studies (Study 3 and 4), new sets of very highly preferred images in categories other than nature scenes (urban scenes and animals) were employed. As before, individual differences in preference for the images (but not image category) was predictive of changes in affect. In Study 5, the nature and urban images from Study 1 were rated on beauty to assess whether the stimuli's preference ratings were capturing anything other than simple aesthetics. Results showed that beauty/aesthetics and preference ('liking') were nearly identical. Lastly, a replication of Study 2 (Study 6) was conducted to test whether priming preference accounted for these benefits, but this was not the case. Together, these results suggest that nature improves affective state because it is such a highly preferred environment.

SUBMITTER: Meidenbauer KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7500282 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it?

Meidenbauer Kimberly L KL Stenfors Cecilia U D CUD Bratman Gregory N GN Gross James J JJ Schertz Kathryn E KE Choe Kyoung Whan KW Berman Marc G MG

Journal of environmental psychology 20200918

Nature interactions have been demonstrated to produce reliable affective benefits. While adults demonstrate strong preferences for natural environments over urban ones, it is not clear whether these affective benefits result from exposure to nature stimuli per se, or result from viewing a highly preferred stimulus. In one set of studies (Study 1 and 2), state affect before and after image viewing was examined as a function of both preference level (high, low, very high, or very low aesthetic val ...[more]

PMID: 32982008

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionNature exposure is a widely accepted option for promoting public health owing to the recent surge of scientific evidence. However, the actual settings to facilitate this initiative is yet to be extensively reviewed. In this systematic review, we have aimed to provide an up-to-date summary of interventional studies investigating the psycho-physiological effects of forests and urban forests, including details on their physical settings, and investigate an effect-modifying role of altitude and summarize data on the magnitude and shape of the association.MethodsA keyword search using five electronic academic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus) was conducted to identify relevant articles published in English from the inception year to the end of February 2022. The methodological quality was evaluated using the ROBINS-I or ROB2 tool, depending on the study design. Meta-regression and random effects model were jointly used to examine the relationship between altitude and health outcomes.ResultsWe included 27 eligible studies and 31 cases extracted from 19 studies were used for the meta-analysis. In the meta-regression, we observed a non-linear association between altitude and psycho-physiological effects. Altitude had a positive quadratic association with anxiety (p < 0.000, adjusted R 2 = 96.79%), depression (p < 0.000, adjusted R 2 = 98.78%), and fatigue (p < 0.000, adjusted R 2 = 64.74%) alleviating effects. Conversely, altitude demonstrated a negative non-linear association with the blood pressure-lowering effect (p = 0.009, adjusted R 2 = 32.83%). Additionally, the thermal index (THI) and illuminance (lx) levels were significantly associated with effect sizes of psychological restoration.DiscussionThis review provides moderate-certainty evidence for an effect-modifying role of altitude. The meta-regression results suggested the optimal and minimal altitude ranges for psychological restoration and physiological relaxation, respectively. Despite some limitations, the study findings provide a significant basis for utilizing altitude, which is easily accessible and simple, to promote the health benefits of nature-based initiatives.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022310894, identifier: CRD42022310894.

Dataset Information

The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it?

Publications

The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets