Preference for Nature in Urbanized Societies - Agnes van den Berg

18 Pages·2007·0.25 MB·English

JournalofSocialIssues,Vol.63,No.1,2007,pp.79--96
Preference for Nature in Urbanized Societies:
Stress, Restoration, and the Pursuit of Sustainability
∗
AgnesE.vandenBerg
WageningenUniversity
TerryHartig
UppsalaUniversity
HenkStaats
LeidenUniversity
Urbanicitypresentsachallengeforthepursuitofsustainability.Highsettlement
density may offer some environmental, economic, and social advantages, but it
can impose psychological demands that people find excessive. These demands
of urban life have stimulated a desire for contact with nature through suburban
residence, leading to planning and transportation practices that have profound
implicationsforthepursuitofsustainability.Somemightdismisspeople’sdesire
forcontactwithnatureastheresultofananti-urbanbiasinconjunctionwitha
romanticviewofnature.However,researchinenvironmentalpsychologysuggests
thatpeople’sdesireforcontactwithnatureservesanimportantadaptivefunction,
namely,psychologicalrestoration.Basedonthisinsight,weofferaperspectiveon
anunderlyingpracticalchallenge:designingcommunitiesthatbalancesettlement
densitywithsatisfactoryaccesstonatureexperience.Wediscussresearchonfour
issues:howpeopletendtobelievethatnatureisrestorative;howrestorationneeds
and beliefs shape environmental preferences; how well people actually achieve
restorationinurbanandnaturalenvironments;andhowcontactwithnaturecan
promote health. In closing, we consider urban nature as a design option that
promotesurbansustainability.
We live in an urbanized world. At present, about 75% of the population
in developed countries lives in dense urban areas (Habitat, 2001). In theory,
∗
CorrespondenceconcerningthisarticleshouldbeaddressedtoA.E.vandenBerg,Wagenin-
genUniversityandResearchCentre,P.O.Box47,6700AA,Wageningen,TheNetherlands[e-mail:
[email protected]].
79
(cid:2)C2007TheSocietyforthePsychologicalStudyofSocialIssues
80 vandenBerg,Hartig,andStaats
high-densitycitiesoffermanyopportunitiesforsustainability,suchasreductions
incaruse,andincreasesinresourceefficiency,accessibility,andeconomicviabil-
ity(Jenks,Burton,&Williams,1996).Inpractice,however,ithasbeendifficult
torealizetheseopportunities(Burgess,2000).Asaresult,manycitiesarestillfar
removed from the safe, clean, and livable environments they theoretically could
be.
Onebarriertoachievingurbansustainabilityisformedbypsychologicalfac-
tors.Urbanlifeingeneral,andurbanstressorssuchasnoisefromtraffic,fearof
crime,andcrowding,inparticular,maymotivatepeopletolookforgreenergrasses
inthesuburbs.Researchonrestorativeenvironmentsindicatesthatthissearchin-
volvesmorethanmerelyaromanticidealizationofnature(Hartig,1993;Kaplan&
Kaplan,1989).Numerousstudieshavedemonstratedthatcontactwithnaturalen-
vironmentsoffersarelativelyeffectivewayofobtainingrestorationfromstressand
mentalfatiguecomparedtoordinaryoutdoorurbanenvironments(HealthCouncil
ofTheNetherlands,2004).However,continuousresidentialmobilitytotheurban
peripheryengendersplanningandtransportationpracticesthatthwartsustainabil-
ity.Moreover,withongoingurbansprawl,individualresidentsmaycometosuffer
from progressively limited access to nature and decreased quality of the nature
experiencestheyhadoriginallysought.
Inthisarticle,wefirstdiscusstheurbansustainabilitychallengeandthelim-
itations of the compact city model as a solution to this challenge. In particular,
we elaborate on a common desire for contact with nature as a barrier to the re-
alization of urban sustainability through compact building. We then discuss two
alternativeperspectivesonpeople’sdesireforcontactwithnature:ruralromanti-
cismandneedsforrestoration.Therelevanceofthelatterexplanationisillustrated
byareviewofrecentempiricalfindings.Inclosing,weconsiderhowurbangreen-
ery might figure in residential design options that promote urban sustainability
consideredinsocialandpsychologicalaswellasphysicalterms.
APsychologicalChallengetoUrbanSustainability
Recentdecadeshavewitnessedincreasingrecognitionofthesignificanceof
globalenvironmentalproblems,andtheimportanceoflocalactioninbothcreating
and addressing these problems. “Sustainability” has emerged as a widely held
andnecessarynotiontoguidesocietaldevelopment.Ingeneral,sustainabilitycan
be defined as the ability of a system to “meet the needs of the present without
compromisingtheabilityoffuturegenerationstomeettheirownneeds”(World
CommissiononEnvironmentandDevelopment[WCED],1987).Citiesandurban
regionsplayanimportantroleinthesustainabilitydebate.Citiescontributetoa
largeextenttoglobalenvironmentalproblemsthatthreatenhumanlife,whileatthe
sametimepeoplelivingincitiesareconfrontedwithinterrelatedlocalproblems
PreferenceforNatureinUrbanizedSocieties 81
such as environmental pollution, health risks, social segregation, and meeting
economicgrowthtargets.Consequently,strategiestomakecitiesmoresustainable
have been formulated by governments and institutions all over the world (e.g.,
European Environment Agency, 1995). These strategies focus on the protection
of environmental resources (e.g., air quality, biodiversity) as well as social and
economicresources(e.g.,livability,prosperity).
Some well-known efforts to achieve urban sustainability have focused on
compactnessasakeyfactortomaintainingenvironmental,social,andeconomic
resources(Banister,Watson,&Wood,1997;Duany,Plater-Zyberk,&Speck2000;
Krier1998).Compactcitiesarecharacterizedbytheclosejuxtapositionofbuild-
ingsandroadswithlimitedinterstitialspacetoinsertgreenery;mixedlanduse;and
aunionofformandfunction(Jenksetal.,1996).Proponentsarguethatcompact
citiesaremoreenergyefficientandlesspollutingbecauseresidentscanlivecloser
toshopsandworkandcanwalk,bike,orusepublictransportinsteadoftheircar.
Insocialterms,compactnessisalsobelievedtoincreasesocialcohesion,equity,
andaccessibility(Duanyetal.,2000;Krier1998).Furthermore,compactcitiesare
considered economically viable because infrastructure, such as roads and street
lighting,canbeprovidedcost-effectivelypercapita.
Neuman(2005)hasrecentlyreviewedempiricalevidenceastowhethercom-
pact cities represent a form of sustainable development. He concludes that the
dataareasyetinconclusive;somestudieshaveshownapositiverelationbetween
compactnessandsustainabilitywhileothershaveshownanegativerelation.These
inconsistentrelationshipsmaybepartlyduetomethodologicalproblems.Different
studieshaveuseddifferentindicatorsofcompactnessandsustainability,andmany
studies have suffered from a lack of control over potential confounding factors.
However,asidefromthesemethodologicalissues,itseemsapparentthatcompact
building has not always fulfilled its promise of attaining a shift in community
developmenttowardmorecompletesustainability.
Explanations of the unsustainability of compact cities have focused mostly
on the ineffectiveness of urban management (Jenks & Burgess, 2000; Williams,
Burton,&Jenks,2000).Inparticular,MitlinandSatterthwaite(1996)haveargued
that“itismuchmorethisfailureofeffectivegovernancewithincitiesthatexplains
thepoorenvironmentalperformanceofsomanycitiesratherthaninherentchar-
acteristics of cities in general” (p. 51). However, there is increasing recognition
thatpsychologicalfactorsplayaroleaswell.Inparticular,ithasbeenarguedthat
there is an inherent tension or paradox between the notion of the compact city
and people’s desire for a spacious, green, and quiet environment (cf. Wiersinga,
1997). Several studies have shown that the urban green space is highly appreci-
ated by residents and an important factor contributing to residential satisfaction
(e.g., Bonaiuto, Aiello, Perugini, Bonnes, & Ercolani, 1999). In compact cities
withlittlegreenspace,thedesireforgreenerlivingenvironmentsmaystimulate
environmentally unsustainable developments such as urban fringe communities
82 vandenBerg,Hartig,andStaats
thatareextremelydependentonautomobilesfortransportation(Kaplan&Austin,
2004).
RuralRomanticismorNeedforRestoration?
Proponentsofthecompactcitymodeltendtoattributeadesiretoseekoutthe
greenergrassesofthesuburbstoaromanticizedviewofrurallife.Thisromanti-
cized view bemoans the perceived disappearance of the simplicity and pureness
ofrurallife,andidealizesnatureinanaivemanner.Suchruralromanticismtends
togohandinhandwithanti-urbansentiments(cf.Bunce,1994).Inparticularin
England and the United States, there is a widely shared belief that cities are, at
best,anecessaryevil,andasourceofviolence,socialdisorder,dirt,andsickness.
Thepro-ruralandanti-urbanideologygainedadditionalinfluenceduringthe
1800s when the devastating living conditions in cities in England during the in-
dustrial revolution provided the fuel for a mass social reform movement. This
movementinspiredanumberofutopianurbanvisions,eachwithitsownprophet,
suchasEbenezerHowardandhisGardenCity;LeCorbusierandhisRadiantCity;
FrankLloydWrightandhisBroadacreCity;andDanielHudsonBurnhamandhis
CityBeautiful.Eachofthesesoughtsomewaytojointhebestofthecitywiththe
bestofthecountryside,andtoaddresstheworstofthecity(therootsoftheanti-
urbanbias)andtheworstofthecountryside(whichrenderedsomeromanticviews
ofnaturenaive).Someoftheseutopianvisionsclearlyshowedthethen-prevailing
enthusiasmfornewconstructionandtransportationtechnologies,andsodidnot
anticipate the problems that in particular automobile transportation would come
topose.
Researchandtheoryonrestorativeenvironmentsprovideanalternativeper-
spective on urban residents’ desire for contact with nature. According to this
perspective, people’s desire for contact with green is more than naive rural ro-
manticism;itmayevenreflectanevolutionaryheritage.AuthorssuchasOrians
andHeerwagen(1992)andKaplanandKaplan(1989)haveproposedthathuman
appreciationofcontactwithnaturemayinpartbeadistanteffectoftheconditions
underwhichearlyhumansevolved.Intheworldtheyinhabited,itwasofvitalim-
portancetoapproachnonthreateningobjectsandsituationsthatprovidedshelter,
food,andotherbasicnecessities,andtoevaluatepositivelyinformationalcharac-
teristicsoftheenvironmentthatsupportedbasicfunctionssuchaswayfinding.As
aresult,modernhumansarestillbornwithapredispositiontolikeorprefercer-
tainfeaturescommontonaturalbutnottourbanorotherbuiltenvironments.This
preference for nature has remained adaptive even for people who live in cities.
Urbanites must often struggle to meet the demands of work, family, and other
obligations against the backdrop of an environment that itself may contribute to
achronicexperienceofstress.Freelysoughtoutcontactwithnaturecanprovide
someimmediaterelieffromthedemandsofcitylife,byprovidingopportunitiesfor
PreferenceforNatureinUrbanizedSocieties 83
therenewalofcognitiveresourcesandpsychophysiologicalresponsecapabilities
(e.g.,Hartig,2004;Kaplan&Kaplan,1989;Ulrich,1983,1993).
Researchonrestorativeenvironmentshasproceededalongseverallines,four
ofwhichwillbediscussedinthenextsections.Afirstlineofresearchhasshown
thatpeopletendtoperceivenaturalenvironmentsasmorerestorativethanurban
environments.Asecondlinehasdemonstratedthatpeople’senvironmentalprefer-
encesareinfluencedbytheirrestorationneedsandbeliefsaboutwhererestoration
can best take place. A third line of research has provided evidence that contact
withnaturalenvironmentscanactuallypromoterestorationfromstressandmental
fatigue. And finally, a fourth line of research has studied the health impacts of
contactwithandaccesstonaturalenvironments.
OntheNatureofBeliefsaboutNature
It appears that people in urbanized societies commonly believe that contact
withnatureprovidesthemwithrestorationfromstressandfatigueandimproves
their health and well-being. For example, in a recent nationwide survey among
inhabitantsofTheNetherlands,95%oftherespondentsindicatedthattheybelieved
that a visit to nature is a useful way of obtaining relief from stress (Frerichs,
2004).InalargesurveyofresidentsinnineSwedishtownsandcities,Grahnand
Stigsdotter(2003)foundthat,whenaskedwhattheywouldrecommendtoafriend
who was feeling stressed and worried, most respondents gave the first rank to
takingawalkintheforest.
People’s belief in the stress-reducing powers of nature can also be inferred
fromresearchonmotivesforoutdoorrecreation(e.g.,Driver,Nash,&Haas1987;
Knopf, 1987). This research has found that stress reduction, clearing the head,
escapefromcivilization,andreflectiononimportantlifeissuesareamongthemost
dominantmotives.Thistypeofmotivehascometobeidentifiedwithpsychological
restoration.
Attention restoration theory (ART; Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989; Kaplan, 1995)
provides a useful explanation for the presumed restorative qualities of nature.
ARTproposesthatprolongedand/orintensiveuseofdirectedattentiondiminishes
aperson’scapacitytowardoffdistractions.Thepersonmaythenshowsignsof
directed attention fatigue, such as difficulty concentrating, increased irritability,
andanincreasedrateoferrorsontasksthatrequireconcentration.Kaplan(1995)
hasdescribedthisconditionasonethatputsapersonatgreaterriskofexperiencing
stressbecauseheorshehaslessofacognitiveresourceneededtomanageeveryday
demands (cf. Lepore & Evans, 1996). A stay in an environment that does not
requirerelianceondirectedattentionallowsthementallyfatiguedpersontorest
theinhibitorymechanismonwhichdirectedattentiondependsandsotorecover
thecapacitytodirectattention.
AccordingtoART,naturalenvironmentsproviderelativelygoodopportuni-
tiesforpsychologicalrestoration,becausetransactionswithnaturalenvironments
84 vandenBerg,Hartig,andStaats
possessseveralqualitiesthat,incombination,emergelesscommonlyinothertypes
ofenvironment.First,beinginnaturegivesapersonasenseofbeingawayfrom
dailyroutinesthatimposedemandsondirectedattention.Second,naturalenviron-
ments contain many esthetically pleasing stimuli, and they encourage processes
of exploration and sense making, and these attract and hold a person’s attention
effortlessly and to some extent involuntarily. This quality, which is assumed to
berootedinevolutionaryhistory,iscalledsoftfascination.Furthermore,thenat-
uralenvironmentallowsasenseofextent,duetocoherenceintheexperienceof
theenvironmentandthescopeforcontinuedexploration.Finally,experiencesin
naturalenvironmentstypicallyinvolveahighdegreeofcompatibility—thatisto
say,whatthepersonwantstodointheenvironmentmatcheswellwithwhatthe
environmentaffordsandwhattheenvironmentrequires.
SeveralgroupsofresearchershavedepartedfromARTineffortstomeasure
perceived restorative quality in environments (Bagot, 2004; Berto, 2005; Han,
2003; Hartig, Korpela, Evans, & Ga¨rling, 1997; Hartig, Mang, & Evans, 1991,
Study 2; Herzog, Maguire, & Nebel, 2003; Korpela & Hartig, 1996; Laumann,
Ga¨rling, & Stormark, 2001). Many of these studies used comparisons of natu-
ralandurbanenvironmentsintheirvalidationstrategies,andtheyfoundthat,in
general,peopledidperceivenaturalenvironmentsasmorerestorativethanurban
environments. For example, in a recent study, Berto (2005) asked volunteers to
ratetherestorativequalityofslidesofnaturalandurbanenvironments.Theslides
withthehighestratingsofrestorativenesswereallnaturescenesoflakes,rivers,
thesea,andhills,whiletheslideswiththelowestratingsofrestorativenesswere
allurbanscenesofcitystreets,industrialzones,andhousingareas.
ItbearsemphasizingherethatARTdoesnotassumethatrestorativeexperi-
encesonlyoccurinnaturalenvironments,nordoesresearchonrestorativeenviron-
mentsmoregenerallyassumethatallurbanpublicplaceslackrestorativequality.
Rather, there is appreciation for the fact that natural and built environments can
havedifferentrestorativepotentialswithregardtothepresenceofrestorativequal-
ities in conjunction with personal needs and characteristics. For example, some
natural environments may not well serve restoration because they are perceived
asdangerous(Herzog&Kutzli,2002;VandenBerg&TerHeijne,2005),while
some urban environments may well support restoration because, in addition to
possessingsomedegreeofrestorativequality,theyarereadilyaccessibleandthus
compatiblewiththelimitedtimebudgetsofmanyurbanites(Scopelliti&Giuliani,
2004).
RestorationNeedsasDriversofEnvironmentalPreference
Peoplenotonlyperceivenaturalenvironmentsasmorerestorativethanurban
environments,theyalsotendtoperceivenaturalenvironmentsasmorebeautiful.
AlargenumberofstudieswithsamplesofEuropean,NorthAmerican,andAsian
PreferenceforNatureinUrbanizedSocieties 85
adultshaveshownthatphotographsofnaturalscenesconsistentlyreceivehigher
ratingsofpreferenceorscenicbeautythanphotographsofurbanscenes(seeUl-
rich,1993,foranoverview).Perceivedbeautyseemstobecloselyintertwinedwith
perceivedrestorativequality.Severalstudieshavedocumentedstrongrelationsbe-
tweenmeasuresofpreferenceorscenicbeautyandperceivedrestorativequality
(e.g.,Purcell,Peron,&Berto,2001).
Thelinkbetweenperceivedrestorativequalityandenvironmentalpreference
might lead one to suppose that the common preference for natural over urban
environments can at least in part be explained by the belief that restoration will
takeplacemoreeasilyinnaturalthaninurbanenvironments(e.g.,Kaplan,1995).
Wehavetestedthisgeneralhypothesisinaseriesofthreeexperiments,inwhich
wemanipulateddegreeofattentionalfatiguetoexaminehowtheattitudetoward
walking in natural and urban environments varied with the need for restoration
(Hartig&Staats,2006;Staats&Hartig,2004;Staats,Kieviet,&Hartig,2003).
Inthefirsttwoexperiments(Staats&Hartig,2004;Staatsetal.,2003)atten-
tionalfatiguewasexperimentallymanipulatedbyaskingDutchstudentstoimagine
themselves as either extremely mentally fatigued or fully fresh and alert. In the
thirdexperiment(Hartig&Staats,2006)weusedanaturalisticfatigueinduction
insteadofscenarios.Swedishstudentsparticipatedintheexperimenteitherinthe
morning before a lecture, when they were still fresh, or in the afternoon after a
longlecture,whentheywerefatigued.Theremainderoftheprocedurewassimilar
for all three experiments. Students took a simulated “walk” through a forest or
city center by watching a series of slides. Next, they rated how pleasant, agree-
able,andsoforththeywouldfindsuchawalkintheircurrent(freshorfatigued)
condition.Theyalsoratedthelikelihoodofrestorationgivena1-hourwalkinthe
environmentjustshown.
The results are shown in Figure 1. In general, the attitude toward walking
for 1 hour in the forest was more positive than the attitude toward walking for
1 hour in the city center. However, all three studies showed that the difference
in attitude toward walking in the forest versus city was greater among those in
the “Fatigue” condition than it was among those in the “No Fatigue” condition.
Notably,thisinteractiveeffectoffatigueandenvironmentonattitudewasweaker
inExperiment3,whichcanbeunderstoodfromthesmallerdifferenceinmental
fatigueacrossconditions.
Inallthreestudies,restorationoutcomeswereevaluatedmorepositivelyby
those in the “Fatigue” condition than by those in the “No Fatigue” condition.
Furthermore, restoration was judged to be much more likely while walking in
the forest than while walking in the urban environment. Finally, likelihood of
restorationcorrelatedsubstantiallyandpositivelywiththeattitudetowardwalking
inthegivenenvironment.Notethatthecorrelationbetweenthejudgedlikelihood
ofrestorationandattitudewaspositiveforboththenaturalenvironmentandthe
urbanenvironment.Thatis,totheextentthatpeoplehadapositiveattitudetoward
86 vandenBerg,Hartig,andStaats
Experiment 1 Experiment 2
e 7 7
cor 6 6
S
e 5 5
d
u 4 4
Attit 3 3
n 2 2
a
e
M 1 1
Attentional No Attentional Attentional Fatigue No Attentional
Fatigue Fatigue Fatigue
Experiment 3
e 7
or
c 6
S
de 5 Forest
u 4
Attit 3 City
n 2
a
e
M 1
Attentional No Attentional
Fatigue Fatigue
Fig.1.Attitudetowardwalkinginthegivenenvironmentasafunctionofthetypeofenvironmentand
thelevelofattentionalfatigueinthreestudies.Ahigherscoreindicatesamorepositiveattitude.Based
onStaatsetal.(2003),StaatsandHartig(2004),andHartigandStaats(2006).
walkingintheurbanenvironment,theyalsosawsomepossibilityforrestoration
there.
Insum,thesethreeexperimentsshowconsistentlythattheneedfor,andper-
ceivedlikelihoodof,restorationfrommentalfatiguetogetherplayaroleinshaping
therelativepreferencefornaturaloverurbanenvironments.Thequestionthenbe-
comeswhetherpeople’sexpectationsofrestorationinnaturalenvironmentshold
true.
RestorativeEffectsofNature
Aswenotedinourintroduction,restorativeeffectsofcontactwithnaturehave
beendemonstratedinagrowingnumberofstudies.Systematicreviewsofthestud-
iesdonetodatehaverecentlybecomeavailable(HealthCouncilofTheNether-
lands,2004;VandenBerg,2005).Thesereviewshavecoveredroughly20true-
andquasi-experimentalstudies.Thestudiesdifferinthewayinwhichparticipants
wereexposedtoenvironments(passiveviewingofrealorsimulatedenvironments
vs.activeentryintoactualenvironments),antecedentconditions(mentalfatigue
PreferenceforNatureinUrbanizedSocieties 87
vs.stress/anxiety),andthetypeofmeasuresused(cognitive,physiological,and/or
affective).Nevertheless,allofthesestudiesfoundgreaterrestorativeeffectsofa
naturalenvironmentcomparedtoacomparison(usuallyurban)environmentonat
leastoneindicatorofrestoration.
Two of our own experimental studies help us speak directly to issues that
we have raised with regard to access to restorative natural settings as a feature
of urban sustainability. The first of these studies involved tracking psychophys-
iological stress recovery and directed attention restoration over time in natural
andurbansettings(Hartig,Evans,Jamner,Davis,&Ga¨rling,2003).Inthisfield
experiment, all of the 112 young adult participants faced the demand of driving
to a field site. On arrival, half of them completed demanding tasks, increasing
the degree of their attentional fatigue just prior to the environmental treatment.
The treatment had a 10-minute seated-indoors phase and a 50-minute walking-
outdoorsphase.Inthenaturalenvironment,thetwophasesweresittinginaroom
with tree views, then walking in a nature reserve. In the urban environment,
the two phases were sitting in a room without views, then walking in an urban
area.Repeatedmeasuresofemotionandattentionwerecollectedbefore,during,
andafterthetreatment.Systolicanddiastolicbloodpressuremeasureswerecol-
lected every 10 minutes, with an additional measure obtained during the seated
treatment.
Theresultsofthisexperimentshowedthat,afterthedriveorthetasks,sitting
inaroomwithtreeviewspromotedmorerapiddeclineindiastolicbloodpressure
thansittinginaviewlessroom(Figure2).Subsequently,walkinginanaturereserve
initiallyfosteredbloodpressurechangethatindicatedgreaterstressreductionthan
affordedbywalkingintheurbansurroundings.Performanceonanattentionaltest
improvedslightlyfromthepretesttothemidpointofthewalkinthenaturereserve,
butsufferedintheurbansetting.Positiveaffectincreasedandangerdecreasedin
thenaturereservebytheendofthewalk,whiletheoppositepatternemergedin
theurbanenvironment.
Ingeneral,thefindingsfromthisexperimentsupportthewidelyheldbelief
that natural surroundings can better aid the psychological restoration of people
livingincitiesthananurbanenvironmentrelativelydevoidofnature.Theblood
pressureresultsalsoillustratetwomorespecificpoints.First,theyspeaktotheben-
efitsoftwoformsofcontactwithnature,oneinvolvingpassiveviewingthrough
a window (as studied by, for example, Kaplan, 2001), and the other involving
movementthroughtheenvironmentwhilewalking.Arguably,bothoftheseforms
ofengagementareimportanttotheurbansustainabilityeffort.Adulturbanresi-
dentsnormallyspendthegreatestpartoftheirwakinglifeindoors,eitherathome
oratwork.Viewsfromindoorsontonaturecansupportmicro-restorativeexperi-
encesthatinterruptstressarousalorthedepletionofattentionalcapacity.Similarly,
whenmovingthroughtheenvironmentfromoneplacetoanother,passagethrough
anaturalsettingmayprovidearespitethat,althoughbrief,nonethelessinterrupts
88 vandenBerg,Hartig,andStaats
Systolic Blood Pressure
10
Natural, Task
Natural, No Task
8 Urban, Task
g Urban, No Task
H
m
m 6
n
i
e
n 4
lie
s
a
B
m 2
o
rf
e
g 0
n
a
h
C
n -2
a
e
M
-4
-6
Diastolic Blood Pressure
10
8
g
H
m
m 6
n
i
e
n 4
lie
s
a
B
m 2
o
rf
e
g 0
n
a
h
C
n -2
a
e
M
-4
-6
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60+
Minutes into Environmental Treatment
Fig.2.Changeinsystolic(toppanel)anddiastolic(bottompanel)bloodpressurerelativetobaselineas
afunctionofenvironmentandpretreatmenttaskcondition.Thereadingat0minutesmarkseitherthe
firstreadinginthefieldlabfollowingthedriveortheendofthetask.Thereadingsat4and10minutes
occurredwhilesubjectssatinaroomwithwindowviewsoftreesandvegetationorinaviewlessroom.
Thereadingsat20,30,40,and50minutesoccurredduringawalkinanaturereserveoranareaof
medium-densityurbandevelopment.Thereadingsat60+minutesoccurredwhilesubjectsagainsat
inaroomwithwindowviewsoftreesorinaviewlessroom.FromHartigetal.(2003).