Comparative analysis of real and virtual greenspaces: Perceived restorativeness and psychological health effects

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the psychological effects of real and virtual greenspaces and identify key environmental features that contribute to perceived restorativeness and mood changes in university students.

Study design

A mixed-methods crossover experimental design was used to evaluate psychological responses to three types of greenspaces: real campus greenspaces, virtual campus greenspaces, and virtual forest greenspaces.

Methods

Thirty-five college students participated in three 20-min greenspace exposures, spaced one week apart in randomized order. Psychological responses were assessed using the Perceived Restorativeness Scale (PRS) and Profile of Mood States (POMS) before and after each session. Semi-structured interviews were conducted post-exposure, and a word frequency analysis was performed to identify environmental features associated with relaxation or tension.

Results

Both real campus and virtual forest greenspaces scored higher across all four PRS dimensions compared to virtual campus greenspaces. Real campus greenspaces also resulted in reductions in negative mood states and an increase in positive mood (vigor), outperforming both virtual conditions. Word frequency analysis revealed plants and water features as the most cited restorative elements, while vehicles and noise were frequently mentioned as non-restorative. Feelings of discomfort were linked to both the presence of others and being alone in virtual environments, highlighting the role of perceived safety.

Conclusions

Real greenspaces offer the most comprehensive psychological benefits, while immersive virtual forests may serve as partial alternatives by alleviating negative mood states. These findings inform the design of restorative environments and highlight key features that support mental well-being in both real and virtual contexts.