Previous research has demonstrated the positive associations between outdoor nature contact and stress reduction. However, similar effects of incorporating natural elements into indoor environment (i.e. biophilic design) have been less well studied. We hypothesize that exposure to biophilic indoor environments help people recover from stress and anxiety and those effects differ among different types of biophilic elements. To test these hypotheses, we conducted a between-subjects experiment with 100 participants using virtual reality (VR). Participants were randomly assigned to experience one of four virtual offices (i.e. one non-biophilic base office and three similar offices enhanced with different biophilic design elements) after stressor tasks. Their physiological indicators of stress reaction, including heart rate variability, heart rate, skin conductance level and blood pressure, were measured by bio-monitoring sensors. Their anxiety level was measured by using State-Trait Anxiety Inventory test (short version). We found that participants in biophilic indoor environments had consistently better recovery responses after stressor compare to those in the non-biophilic environment, in terms of reduction on stress and anxiety. Effects on physiological responses are immediate after exposure to biophilic environments with the larger impacts in the first four minutes of the 6-minute recovery process. Additionally, these restorative effects differ among three different types of indoor biophilic environments. This research provides evidence that biophilic design elements that impact stress recovery and anxiety. It also demonstrated the potential that virtual reality may be a way to bring nature and its therapeutic benefits to patients in hospitals.

While many studies suggest evidence for the health benefits of nature, there is currently no standardized method to measure time spent in nature or nature contact, nor agreement on how best to define nature contact in research. The purpose of this review is to summarize how nature contact has been measured in recent health research and provide insight into current metrics of exposure to nature at individual and population scales. The most common methods include surrounding greenness, questionnaires, and global positioning systems (GPS) tracking. Several national-level surveys exist, though these are limited by their cross-sectional design, often measuring only a single component of time spent in nature, and poor links to measures of health. In future research, exposure assessment combining the quantifying (e.g., time spent in nature and frequency of visits to nature) and qualifying (e.g., greenness by the normalized difference of vegetation index (NDVI) and ratings on perception by individuals) aspects of current methods and leveraging innovative methods (e.g., experience sampling methods, ecological momentary assessment) will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the health effects of nature exposure and inform health policy and urban planning.

Despite recent progress in the research of people’s emotional response to the environment, the built—rather than natural—environment’s emotional effects have not yet been thoroughly examined. In response to this knowledge gap, we recruited 26 participants and scrutinized their emotional response to various urban street scenes through an immersive exposure experiment using virtual reality. We utilized new physiological monitoring technologies that enable synchronized observation of the participants’ electroencephalography, electrodermal activity, and heart rate, as well as their subjective indicators. With the newly introduced measurement for the global visual patterns of the built environment, we built statistical models to examine people’s emotional response to the physical element configuration and color composition of street scenes. We found that more diverse and less fragmented scenes inspired positive emotional feelings. We also found (in)consistency among the physiological and subjective indicators, indicating a potentially interesting neural−physiological interpretation for the classic form−function dichotomy in architecture. Besides the practical implications on promoting physical environment design, this study combined objective physiology-monitoring technology and questionnaire-based research techniques to demonstrate a better approach to quantify environment−emotion relationships.

Lockdown aiming at slowing COVID-19 transmission has altered nature accessibility patterns, creating quasi-experimental conditions to assess if retracted nature contact and perceived nature deprivation influence physical and emotional wellbeing. We measure through on-line survey methods (n = 529) how pandemic mandates limiting personal movement and outdoor nature access within the United States affect self-assessed nature exposure, perceived nature deprivation, and subsequent flourishing as measured by the Harvard Flourishing Index. Results indicate that perceived nature deprivation strongly associates with local nature contact, time in nature, and access to municipal nature during the pandemic, after controlling for lockdown mandates, job status, household composition, and sociodemographic variables. Our hypothesis is that individuals with strong perceived nature deprivation under COVID-19 leads to diminished wellbeing proved true. Interaction models of flourishing showed positive modification of nature affinity with age and qualitative modification of nature deprivation with race. Our results demonstrate the potential of local nature contact to support individual wellbeing in a background context of emotional distress and social isolation, important in guiding public health policies beyond pandemics.