Craig W. McDougall , Lewis R. Elliott , Mathew P. White , James Grellier , Simon Bell , Gregory N. Bratman , Mark Nieuwenhuijsen , Maria L. Lima , Ann Ojala , Marta Cirach , Anne Roiko , Matilda van den Bosch , Lora E. Fleming
{"title":"哪些类型的自然接触与享乐型、愉悦型和评价型幸福感相关?18 国研究","authors":"Craig W. McDougall , Lewis R. Elliott , Mathew P. White , James Grellier , Simon Bell , Gregory N. Bratman , Mark Nieuwenhuijsen , Maria L. Lima , Ann Ojala , Marta Cirach , Anne Roiko , Matilda van den Bosch , Lora E. Fleming","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Although spending time in nature can improve subjective wellbeing (SWB), little is known about how different types of nature exposure are associated with different dimensions of SWB or the consistency of associations across national/cultural contexts. Using data from 18 countries, associations between green, coastal and freshwater blue space exposures (including residential availability, visits ‘yesterday’ and visits in the previous four weeks) and hedonic, eudaimonic, and evaluative wellbeing were estimated. Overall, residential nature availability showed little association with any wellbeing outcome, whereas visiting green and coastal locations ‘yesterday’ was associated with better hedonic wellbeing. Although frequently visiting green, coastal and freshwater spaces were all associated with greater evaluative wellbeing, greater eudaimonic wellbeing was only associated with frequent visits to green and freshwater spaces. Variations existed across countries. Results suggest that different types of nature exposure vary in their association with different dimensions of SWB. Understanding these differences may help us maximise the potential of natural environments as SWB-promoting resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48439,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","volume":"100 ","pages":"Article 102479"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What types of nature exposure are associated with hedonic, eudaimonic and evaluative wellbeing? An 18-country study\",\"authors\":\"Craig W. McDougall , Lewis R. Elliott , Mathew P. White , James Grellier , Simon Bell , Gregory N. Bratman , Mark Nieuwenhuijsen , Maria L. Lima , Ann Ojala , Marta Cirach , Anne Roiko , Matilda van den Bosch , Lora E. Fleming\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Although spending time in nature can improve subjective wellbeing (SWB), little is known about how different types of nature exposure are associated with different dimensions of SWB or the consistency of associations across national/cultural contexts. Using data from 18 countries, associations between green, coastal and freshwater blue space exposures (including residential availability, visits ‘yesterday’ and visits in the previous four weeks) and hedonic, eudaimonic, and evaluative wellbeing were estimated. Overall, residential nature availability showed little association with any wellbeing outcome, whereas visiting green and coastal locations ‘yesterday’ was associated with better hedonic wellbeing. Although frequently visiting green, coastal and freshwater spaces were all associated with greater evaluative wellbeing, greater eudaimonic wellbeing was only associated with frequent visits to green and freshwater spaces. Variations existed across countries. Results suggest that different types of nature exposure vary in their association with different dimensions of SWB. Understanding these differences may help us maximise the potential of natural environments as SWB-promoting resources.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Psychology\",\"volume\":\"100 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102479\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494424002524\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494424002524","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
What types of nature exposure are associated with hedonic, eudaimonic and evaluative wellbeing? An 18-country study
Although spending time in nature can improve subjective wellbeing (SWB), little is known about how different types of nature exposure are associated with different dimensions of SWB or the consistency of associations across national/cultural contexts. Using data from 18 countries, associations between green, coastal and freshwater blue space exposures (including residential availability, visits ‘yesterday’ and visits in the previous four weeks) and hedonic, eudaimonic, and evaluative wellbeing were estimated. Overall, residential nature availability showed little association with any wellbeing outcome, whereas visiting green and coastal locations ‘yesterday’ was associated with better hedonic wellbeing. Although frequently visiting green, coastal and freshwater spaces were all associated with greater evaluative wellbeing, greater eudaimonic wellbeing was only associated with frequent visits to green and freshwater spaces. Variations existed across countries. Results suggest that different types of nature exposure vary in their association with different dimensions of SWB. Understanding these differences may help us maximise the potential of natural environments as SWB-promoting resources.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Environmental Psychology is the premier journal in the field, serving individuals in a wide range of disciplines who have an interest in the scientific study of the transactions and interrelationships between people and their surroundings (including built, social, natural and virtual environments, the use and abuse of nature and natural resources, and sustainability-related behavior). The journal publishes internationally contributed empirical studies and reviews of research on these topics that advance new insights. As an important forum for the field, the journal publishes some of the most influential papers in the discipline that reflect the scientific development of environmental psychology. Contributions on theoretical, methodological, and practical aspects of all human-environment interactions are welcome, along with innovative or interdisciplinary approaches that have a psychological emphasis. Research areas include: •Psychological and behavioral aspects of people and nature •Cognitive mapping, spatial cognition and wayfinding •Ecological consequences of human actions •Theories of place, place attachment, and place identity •Environmental risks and hazards: perception, behavior, and management •Perception and evaluation of buildings and natural landscapes •Effects of physical and natural settings on human cognition and health •Theories of proenvironmental behavior, norms, attitudes, and personality •Psychology of sustainability and climate change •Psychological aspects of resource management and crises •Social use of space: crowding, privacy, territoriality, personal space •Design of, and experiences related to, the physical aspects of workplaces, schools, residences, public buildings and public space