Environmental influences on psychological restoration

Abstract

Research on psychological restoration and restorative environments is a needed complement to work on stress and environmental stressors. Two laboratory experiments tested the utility of two restorative environments theories, one concerned with directed attention capacity renewal and the other with stress reduction and associated changes in emotion. Various strategies were employed to distinguish restorative effects from other effects, to limit the role of arousal reduction in attentional restoration, and to begin mapping the time course for the emergence of outcomes. Both experiments tested for differential emotional and performance effects as a function of photographic environmental simulation (natural or urban environment). Across the experiments the natural environment simulation engendered generally more positive emotional self-reports. That consistent performance effects were not found in either study suggests that attentional restoration as reflected in performance is a more time-intensive process.

When walking in nature is not restorative—The role of prospect and refuge

“…Moreover, much of this research takes place in laboratory settings (e.g. Hartig et al, 1996;Staats & Hartig, 2004;Ulrich et al, 1991-see Hartig et al, 1991Hartig et al, 2003;Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989, for exceptions). But many natural environments are not like this and not all experiences in nature are positive (Van den Berg & Ter Heijne, 2005).…”

“…The ZIPERS has been a sensitive measure of emotional restoration in a number of previous restorative environment studies (e.g. Hartig et al, 1991Hartig et al, , 1996Hartig et al, , 2003Ulrich et al, 1991). Higher emotional restoration is characterised by more positive mood states (high positive affect but low fear arousal, sadness and anger).…”

Place attachment and pro-environmental behaviour in national parks: the development of a conceptual framework

“…Evidence suggests that natural settings tend to increase positive emotions in individuals about the setting (Hartig, Book, Garvill, Olsson, & Garling, 1996;Ulrich, 1979). Individuals with greater experience with natural environments may express stronger emotional connections than those with lesser experience (Hinds & Sparks, 2008).…”

Flourishing in nature: A review of the benefits of connecting with nature and its application as a wellbeing intervention

“…Humans have begun living in urban environments only recently (Wilson, 1984); therefore, the need to connect with nature likely remains an innate part of who we are. Although evolutionary concepts like biophilia are difficult to test, suggestive evidence comes from studies that find preferences for nature scenes over built environments (Dopko, Zelenski, & Nisbet, 2014;Hartig, Böök, Garvill, Olsson, & Gärling, 1996;Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989;Kaplan, Kaplan, & Wendt, 1972;Ulrich, 1981;Van den Berg, Koole, & van der Wulp, 2003), and attraction to nature being evidenced across diverse cultures (e.g., Ulrich, 1993;Newell, 1997) and at very young ages (e.g., Kahn, 1997). A multitude of studies, discussed below, also suggest that satisfying our need to connect with nature boosts wellbeing.…”