The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective

Product Information

Hulme, M. Problems with making and governing global kinds of knowledge. Glob. Env. Change 20, 558–564 (2010). Biophilic design dimensions were first introduced in the book ‘Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life’ [ 1]. According to the book, there are two basic dimensions of biophilic design; the first dimension is the organic or naturalistic dimension, which represents the shapes and forms. The becond basic dimension is the place-based or vernacular dimension, which represents the buildings and landscapes connected to the culture and ecology of the local environment [ 21]. Wilson, E. O. (1986). Biophilia: the Human Bond with Other Species. Cambridge: Harvard University Press We have enjoyed working on these topics, in collaboration with students and colleagues in various disciplines. Gradually, over the years, the outlines of responses to these questions have begun to emerge - not definitive answers by any means, but ways of thinking about these issues that colleagues, students, and many practitioners say they find stimulating and useful. Gradually these ways of thinking have grown and converged. They have come to constitute both a critical mass of material and a framework that has a reasonable degree of coherence.

We define nature in a broad sense as “the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations” [ 15]. We consider nature to include phenomena as varied as landscapes, microorganisms, and pets, and we also include nature simulations. We consider health as “the state of being free from illness or injury”, and as a statement about one’s mental or physical condition [ 15]. Finally, we define wellbeing as “the state of being comfortable, healthy, or happy” [ 15], and including self-acceptance, personal growth, purpose in life, environmental mastery, autonomy, and positive relations with others [ 16]. It further includes the important domains of mental well-being, social well-being, physical well-being, spiritual well-being, activities and functioning, and personal circumstances [ 17]. Therefore wellbeing is a very broad category encompassing concepts as varied as “freedom from noise” and “memory recall”.Later, in 2015, the principles of biophilic design were introduced in the book ‘The Practice of Biophilic Design’ [ 38]. These principles were repeated engagement with nature, focusing on human adaptations to the natural world, encouraging emotional attachment to specific places, promoting positive interactions between people and nature, and encouraging interconnected and incorporated architecture solutions. Also, the experience of nature was grouped into three types: direct experience of nature, indirect experience of nature, and the experience of space and place [ 38]. Categories and patterns of biophilic design United Nations Environment Program Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication (2011). Those generous behaviors weren’t attributed to students’ moods, Zelenski and his colleagues found, so it wasn’t simply that spending time in nature made them happier and therefore more giving. Another plausible (though unproven) explanation is the emotion of awe. “There are some hints that awe is associated with generosity, and nature can be a way to induce awe,” he says. “One of the things that may come from awe is the feeling that the individual is part of a much bigger whole.” Experience vs. connection Touch is also rather poorly studied, and many of the references we reviewed were not directly about touch. However, there are intriguing indications that touching animals contributes to health and well-being, and we suggest that this be researched more thoroughly and experimentally where possible. There is also a significant gap in the literature with regards to touching non-animal aspects of nature, such as plants.

Mycobacterium vaccae is an aerobic, temperate bacterium to which we are exposed in water, soil, and vegetation [ 337, 338, 339]. As an aerobe, it does not colonize the intestinal tract, but is considered a “transient commensal” [ 340]. It is believed that M. vaccae alters serotonin levels, affecting mood, arousal, and learning [ 341, 342], and in mice, it lowered maze run times, mistakes, and anxiety behaviors [ 311]. This effect was temporary, only affecting the mice while the bacteria was in their system. How does it work? What lies behind the power of environments that not only attract and are appreciated by people but are apparently able to restore hassled individuals to healthy and effective functioning? Lau, S.S.Y., Gou, Z., Liu, Y., (2014). Healthy camps by open space design: approach and guideline. Front Archit Res 3:452–467

The smell benefits literature could be usefully expanded by focusing on nature smells and the benefits we receive from them, using actual natural products to produce the smells, in the lab and also in situ. Comparisons among negatively and positively-valenced smells to give an idea of smell preference would be interesting, and could start to reveal information about how smells relate to preference and well-being. Finally, self-report studies looking at memories of preferred smells might provide some insight. Noise pollution has become an increasing public complaint in the last decade [ 67], and some 80 million Europeans live with unacceptably high urban noise levels [ 68]. Chronic noise contributes to stress, annoyance, cardiovascular problems, sleep disturbance, and decreased task performance [ 69, 70, 71]. It has both psychological and physical effects ranging from elevated blood pressure, poor sustained attention, and memory problems to sleep disturbances, increased risk of myocardial infarction, annoyance, and learned helplessness [ 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78]. These effects can occur below our level of awareness [ 79]. There is even evidence that images of nature can be beneficial. Frantz and colleagues compared outcomes of people who walked outside in either natural or urban settings with those of people who watched videos of those settings. They found that any exposure to nature—in person or via video—led to improvements in attention, positive emotions and the ability to reflect on a life problem. But the effects were stronger among those who actually spent time outside (Mayer, F.S., et al., Environment and Behavior, Vol. 41, No. 5, 2009).