Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Being outdoors benefits both humans' physical and mental well-being, but the reasons for this connection are difficult to pinpoint. This study examines 40 recreational areas to understand their individual characteristics' impact on mental well-being. We interviewed 1184 visitors on their perception of the place and feeling of mental well-being. In a second survey, 49 participants were shown images of the areas to assess whether they perceived them in the same way as people on-site did. Biologists then evaluated the areas through bird and biotope surveys, also assessing various other landscape characteristics of the study areas. Analysis using a two-level multivariate GLM revealed that perceived naturalness and perceived bird diversity are significant predictors of improved mental well-being. On the flip side, mental well-being declines with increased human impact, as indicated by the amount of infrastructure and the Human Footprint Index value. Notably, perceived naturalness positively correlates with actual bird diversity (p = 0.005) and negatively with human impact (p = 0.006). A strong perception of birds enhances the mental well-being of greenspace visitors (p < 0.001), while a high birding specialization negatively affects recalled restoration (p = 0.014). The estimated restoration value (p = 0.001) and estimated beauty (p < 0.001) from the online survey correlate positively with emotions experienced on-site. The perception of naturalness in images aligns with on-site perception, suggesting pathways for future research and the design of recreational areas.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vanhöfen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: