Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines emotional and physiological responses in university students exposed to biophilic design, indicating its effectiveness in learning environments.
This study examines the impact of biophilic design in school common areas—specifically corridors, stairwells, and central halls—on users’ perceptual and physiological responses. Biophilic design attributes were categorized into direct experiences (Plants & water) and indirect experiences (Materials & Images), and simulation stimuli for each common area type were generated using generative AI. Thirty university students participated in the experiment, where their hemodynamic responses (fNIRS) and galvanic skin responses (GSRs) were measured during exposure to various biophilic environmental stimuli to quantitatively analyze emotional arousal and cognitive recovery levels. The results indicated that biophilic environments elicited significant physiological stabilization responses in specific spatial and application conditions compared to non-biophilic settings. Distinct physiological responses were observed based on spatial characteristics and application methods; vertical elements facilitated cognitive rest, whereas horizontal elements promoted attention restoration through moderate arousal. Furthermore, significant associations between nature connectedness and selected physiological responses highlighted the importance of considering individual predispositions in spatial design. As an exploratory pilot study, this research contributes preliminary evidence by integrating generative AI-based simulations with fNIRS and GSR measurements to examine vertical and horizontal biophilic applications in school common areas.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: