This paper explores how everyday encounters with two natural phenomena -natural elements and daylight- influence affect and stress levels for people differing in mental health. Nature and daylight exposure both have well-documented beneficial effects on mental health and affect but to what extent their exposure has beneficial effects in daily life is currently under investigated, as is the question whether lower mental health would make one more, or instead, less responsive. To this end, an ecological momentary assessment protocol was employed for a period of 6 days. Fifty-nine participants varying in level of depressive symptoms from none to clinical completed momentary assessments of affect, stress, and their physical environment. Results indicate beneficial effects of nature and daylight on affect and some effects on stress and stress-related outcomes. For nature exposure, but not for daylight exposure, effects were stronger for those in higher need of restoration, stressing the importance of our everyday environment for mental wellbeing.

Green space matters for mental health but is under constant pressure in an increasingly urbanising world. Often there is little space available in cities for green areas, so it is vital to optimise the design and usage of these available green spaces. To achieve this, experts in planning, design and nature conservation need to know which types and characteristics of green spaces are most beneficial for residents' mental health. A scoping review of studies that compare different green space types and characteristics on mental health was conducted. A total of 215 (experimental, observational and qualitative) papers were included in the scoping review. This review highlights a high level of heterogeneity in study design, geographical locations, mental health outcomes and green space measures. Few of the included studies were specifically designed to enable direct comparisons between green space types and characteristics (e.g. between parks and forests). The included studies have predominantly experimental research designs looking at the effects of short‐term exposure to green space on short‐term mental health outcomes (e.g. affect and physiological stress). More studies enabled only indirect comparisons, either within the same study or between different studies. Analysis of the direction of the mental health outcomes (positive, neutral, negative) from exposure to various types and characteristics of green space found positive (i.e. beneficial) effects across all green space types. However, green space characteristics did appear to render more diverse effects on mental health, which is especially the case for vegetation characteristics (e.g. higher vegetation density can be negative for mental health). The scoping review reveals gaps in the present evidence base, with a specific need for more studies directly comparing green space types and characteristics within the same study. Proposed future research directions include the use of longitudinal research designs focusing on green space characteristics, considering actual exposure and systematically addressing heterogeneity in factors influencing the relation between green spaces and mental health (e.g. type of interaction, user experience). Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

More and more people use self-tracking technologies to track their psychological states, physiology, and behaviors to gain a better understanding of themselves or to achieve a certain goal. Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) also offers an excellent opportunity for restorative environments research, which examines how our physical environment (especially nature) can positively influence health and wellbeing. It enables investigating restorative health effects in everyday life, providing not only high ecological validity but also opportunities to study in more detail the dynamic processes playing out over time on recovery, thereby bridging the gap between laboratory (i.e., short-term effects) and epidemiological (long-term effects) research. We have identified four main areas in which self-tracking could help advance restoration research: (1) capturing a rich set of environment types and restorative characteristics; (2) distinguishing intra-individual from inter-individual effects; (3) bridging the gap between laboratory and epidemiological research; and (4) advancing theoretical insights by measuring a more broad range of effects in everyday life. This paper briefly introduces restorative environments research, then reviews the state of the art of self-tracking technologies and methodologies, discusses how these can be implemented to advance restoration research, and presents some examples of pioneering work in this area.

People generally prefer natural over urban environments, but little is known about what people think about when they see these environments. The aim of the present study was to investigate the associations with these scenes and their relation with preference. In a series of three studies 336 participants were asked to generate associations with photos. Study One manipulated naturalness of the environment as well as weather type. The data were analysed quantitatively by asking participants to rate the associations on valence, and qualitatively by a post hoc pile-sorting task on the associations. We found that associations with natural and sunny environments were more positive than those with urban and overcast environments. Natural scenes seem to elicit mainly positively valenced associations, whereas associations with urban environments were mixed. Content analyses confirmed these outcomes, indicating that how we experience an environment as well as its’ restorative potential are important for preference formation.