Cargando…
The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it?
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 pre...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier Ltd.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7500282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32982008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101498 |
_version_ | 1783583831908941824 |
---|---|
author | Meidenbauer, Kimberly L. Stenfors, Cecilia U.D. Bratman, Gregory N. Gross, James J. Schertz, Kathryn E. Choe, Kyoung Whan Berman, Marc G. |
author_facet | Meidenbauer, Kimberly L. Stenfors, Cecilia U.D. Bratman, Gregory N. Gross, James J. Schertz, Kathryn E. Choe, Kyoung Whan Berman, Marc G. |
author_sort | Meidenbauer, Kimberly L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7500282 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Elsevier Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75002822020-09-21 The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? Meidenbauer, Kimberly L. Stenfors, Cecilia U.D. Bratman, Gregory N. Gross, James J. Schertz, Kathryn E. Choe, Kyoung Whan Berman, Marc G. J Environ Psychol Article 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. Elsevier Ltd. 2020-12 2020-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7500282/ /pubmed/32982008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101498 Text en © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Meidenbauer, Kimberly L. Stenfors, Cecilia U.D. Bratman, Gregory N. Gross, James J. Schertz, Kathryn E. Choe, Kyoung Whan Berman, Marc G. The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? |
title | The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? |
title_full | The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? |
title_fullStr | The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? |
title_full_unstemmed | The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? |
title_short | The affective benefits of nature exposure: What's nature got to do with it? |
title_sort | affective benefits of nature exposure: what's nature got to do with it? |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7500282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32982008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101498 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT meidenbauerkimberlyl theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT stenforsceciliaud theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT bratmangregoryn theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT grossjamesj theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT schertzkathryne theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT choekyoungwhan theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT bermanmarcg theaffectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT meidenbauerkimberlyl affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT stenforsceciliaud affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT bratmangregoryn affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT grossjamesj affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT schertzkathryne affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT choekyoungwhan affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit AT bermanmarcg affectivebenefitsofnatureexposurewhatsnaturegottodowithit |