The impact of virtual reality natural and built environments on affective responses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References

• Ahn SJG, Bailenson JN, Park D. 2014. Short-And long-term effects of embodied experiences in immersive virtual environments on environmental locus of control and behavior. Comput Human Behav. 39:235–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarsson JJ, Wiens S, Nilsson ME. 2010. Stress recovery during exposure to nature sound and environmental noise. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 7(3):1036–1046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson AP, Mayer MD, Fellows AM, Cowan DR, Hegel MT, Buckey JC. 2017. Relaxation with immersive natural scenes presented using virtual reality. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 88(6):520–526. 10.3357/AMHP.4747.2017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Annerstedt M, Jönsson P, Wallergård M, Johansson G, Karlson B, Grahn P, Hansen ÅM, Währborg P. 2013. Inducing physiological stress recovery with sounds of nature in a virtual reality forest—results from a pilot study. Physiol Behav. 118:240–250. 10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.05.023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appel L, Appel E, Bogler O, Wiseman M, Cohen L, Ein N, Abrams HB, Campos JL. 2020. Older adults with cognitive and/or physical impairments can benefit from immersive virtual reality experiences: a feasibility study. Front Med. 6:329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey AW, Allen G, Herndon J, Demastus C. 2018. Cognitive benefits of walking in natural versus built environments. World Leis J. 60(4):293–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baños RM, Carrillo A, Etchemendy E, Botella C. 2017. Positive technologies for understanding and promoting positive emotions. Span J Psychol. 20: e50. 10.1017/sjp.2017.42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battisto D, Vincent E, Dye CJ. 2018. Technological supports to increase nature contact for older adults. In: Collins- Mclaughlin A, Pak R editor. Aging, technology and health. Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States: Academic Press; pp. 113–133.
   Google Scholar
• Bolouki A. (2022). Exploring the association between self-reported and objective measures in search of the restorative quality of natural environments: a systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 1–15. 10.1080/09603123.2022.2085675
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bratman GN, Hamilton JP, Daily GC. 2012. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1249(1):118–136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breves P, Heber V. 2020. Into the wild: the effects of 360 immersive nature videos on feelings of commitment to the environment. Environ Commun. 14(3):332–346.
   Google Scholar
• Brown DK, Barton JL, Gladwell VF. 2013. Viewing nature scenes positively affects recovery of autonomic function following acute-mental stress. Environ Sci Technol. 47(11):5562–5569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browning MH, Saeidi-Rizi F, McAnirlin O, Yoon H, Pei Y. 2021. The role of methodological choices in the effects of experimental exposure to simulated natural landscapes on human health and cognitive performance: a systematic review. Environ Behav. 53(7):687–731.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browning MH, Shipley N, McAnirlin O, Becker D, Yu C-P, Hartig T, Dzhambov AM. 2020. An actual natural setting improves mood better than its virtual counterpart: a meta-analysis of experimental data. Front Psychol. 11:2200. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calogiuri G, Litleskare S, Fagerheim KA, Rydgren TL, Brambilla E, Thurston M. 2018. Experiencing nature through immersive virtual environments: environmental perceptions, physical engagement, and affective responses during a simulated nature walk. Front Psychol. 8:2321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang C-Y, Hammitt WE, Chen P-K, Machnik L, Su W-C. 2008. Psychophysiological responses and restorative values of natural environments in Taiwan. Landsc Urban Plan. 85(2):79–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan SHM, Qiu L, Esposito G, Mai KP, Tam K-P, Cui J. 2021. Nature in virtual reality improves mood and reduces stress: evidence from young adults and senior citizens. Virtual Real. 26:1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Chirico A, Cipresso P, Yaden DB, Biassoni F, Riva G, Gaggioli A. 2017. Effectiveness of immersive videos in inducing awe: an experimental study. Sci Rep. 7(1):1–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chirico A, Ferrise F, Cordella L, Gaggioli A. 2018. Designing awe in virtual reality: an experimental study. Front Psychol. 8:2351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung K, Lee D, Park JY. 2018. Involuntary attention restoration during exposure to mobile-based 360 virtual nature in healthy adults with different levels of restorative experience: event-related potential study. J Med Internet Res. 20(11):e11152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. 1992. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 112(1):155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford J R and Henry J D. (2004). The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43(3), 245–265. 10.1348/0144665031752934
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Cunha NM, Nguyen D, Naumovski N, McKune AJ, Kellett J, Georgousopoulou EN, Frost J, Isbel S. 2019. A mini-review of virtual reality-based interventions to promote well-being for people living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Gerontology. 65(4):430–440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng L, Li X, Luo H, Fu E-K, Ma J, Sun L-X, Huang Z, Cai S-Z, Jia Y. 2020. Empirical study of landscape types, landscape elements and landscape components of the urban park promoting physiological and psychological restoration. Urban For Urban Green. 48:126488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diniz Bernardo P, Bains A, Westwood S, Mograbi DC. 2021. Mood induction using virtual reality: a systematic review of recent findings. J Technol Behav Sci. 6(1):3–24.
   Google Scholar
• Emamjomeh A, Zhu Y, Beck M. 2020. The potential of applying immersive virtual environment to biophilic building design: a pilot study. J Build Eng. 32:101481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans JL, Hahn JA, Page-Shafer K, Lum PJ, Stein ES, Davidson PJ, Moss AR. 2003. Gender differences in sexual and injection risk behavior among active young injection drug users in San Francisco (the UFO study). J Urban Health. 80(1):137–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felnhofer A, Kothgassner OD, Schmidt M, Heinzle A-K, Beutl L, Hlavacs H, Kryspin-Exner I. 2015. Is virtual reality emotionally arousing? Investigating five emotion inducing virtual park scenarios. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 82:48–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman D, Reeve S, Robinson A, Ehlers A, Clark D, Spanlang B, Slater M. 2017. Virtual reality in the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental health disorders. Psychol Med. 47(14):2393–2400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao T, Zhang T, Zhu L, Gao Y, Qiu L. 2019. Exploring psychophysiological restoration and individual preference in the different environments based on virtual reality. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 16(17):3102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerber SM, Jeitziner M-M, Sänger SD, Knobel SE, Marchal-Crespo L, Müri RM, Schefold JC, Jakob SM, Nef T. 2019. Comparing the relaxing effects of different virtual reality environments in the intensive care unit: observational study. JMIR Perioper Med. 2(2):e15579.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gerber SM, Jeitziner M-M, Wyss P, Chesham A, Urwyler P, Müri RM, Jakob SM, Nef T. 2017. Visuo-Acoustic stimulation that helps you to relax: a virtual reality setup for patients in the intensive care unit. Sci Rep. 7(1):1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gladwell V, Brown D, Barton JL, Tarvainen M, Kuoppa P, Pretty J, Suddaby J, Sandercock G. 2012. The effects of views of nature on autonomic control. EUR J Appl Physiol. 112(9):3379–3386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gladwell VF, Brown DK, Wood C, Sandercock GR, Barton JL. 2013. The great outdoors: how a green exercise environment can benefit all. Extreme Physiol Med. 2(1):1–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Golding SE, Gatersleben B, Cropley M. 2018. An experimental exploration of the effects of exposure to images of nature on rumination. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 15(2):300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grassini S, Revonsuo A, Castellotti S, Petrizzo I, Benedetti V, Koivisto M. 2019. Processing of natural scenery is associated with lower attentional and cognitive load compared with urban ones. J Environ Psychol. 62:1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grazuleviciene R, Vencloviene J, Kubilius R, Grizas V, Danileviciute A, Dedele A, Andrusaityte S, Vitkauskiene A, Steponaviciute R, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ. 2016. Tracking restoration of park and urban street settings in coronary artery disease patients. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 13(6):550.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grilli G, Barbierato E, Capecchi I, Sacchelli S. 2022. Application of stated-preferences methods and neuroscience for the valuation of dynamicity in forest cultural ecosystem services. J Environ Plan Manag. 65(3):398–417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartig T, Böök A, Garvill J, Olsson T, Gärling T. 1996. Environmental influences on psychological restoration. Scand J Psychol. 37(4):378–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartig T, Evans GW, Jamner LD, Davis DS, Gärling T. 2003. Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. J Environ Psychol. 23(2):109–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartig T, Korpela K, Evans GW, Gärling T. 1997. A measure of restorative quality in environments. Scand Hous Plan Res. 14(4):175–194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartig T, Mitchell R, De Vries S, Frumkin H. 2014. Nature and health. Annu Rev Public Health. 35:207–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedblom M, Gunnarsson B, Iravani B, Knez I, Schaefer M, Thorsson P, Lundström JN. 2019. Reduction of physiological stress by urban green space in a multisensory virtual experiment. Sci Rep. 9(1):1–11.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. 2003. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Bmj. 327(7414):557–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong S, Joung D, Lee J, Kim D-Y, Kim S, Park B-J. 2019. The effects of watching a virtual reality (vr) forest video on stress reduction in adults. J People Plants Environ. 22(3):309–319. doi:10.11628/ksppe.2019.22.3.309.
   Google Scholar
• Huang Q, Yang M, Jane H-A, Li S, Bauer N. 2020. Trees, grass, or concrete? the effects of different types of environments on stress reduction. Landsc Urban Plan. 193:103654.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan S. 1995. The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. J Environ Psychol. 15(3):169–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjellgren A, Buhrkall H. 2010. A comparison of the restorative effect of a natural environment with that of a simulated natural environment. J Environ Psychol. 30(4):464–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knaust T, Felnhofer A, Kothgassner OD, Höllmer H, Gorzka R-J, Schulz H. 2021. Exposure to virtual nature: the impact of different immersion levels on skin conductance level, heart rate, and perceived relaxation. Virtual Real. 26:1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kondo MC, Fluehr JM, McKeon T, Branas CC. 2018. Urban green space and its impact on human health. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 15(3):445.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li H, Dong W, Wang Z, Chen N, Wu J, Wang G, Jiang T. 2021. Effect of a virtual reality-based restorative environment on the emotional and cognitive recovery of individuals with mild-to-moderate anxiety and depression. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 18(17):9053.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu L, Qu H, Ma Y, Wang K, Qu H. 2022. Restorative benefits of urban green space: physiological, psychological restoration and eye movement analysis. J Environ Manage. 301:113930.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohr VI, Pearson-Mims CH. 2000. Physical discomfort may be reduced in the presence of interior plants. Hort Technol. 10(1):53–58.
   Google Scholar
• Mattila O, Korhonen A, Pöyry E, Hauru K, Holopainen J, Parvinen P. 2020. Restoration in a virtual reality forest environment. Comput Human Behav. 107:106295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAllister E, Bhullar N, Schutte NS. 2017. Into the woods or a stroll in the park: how virtual contact with nature impacts positive and negative affect. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 14(7):786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahan EA, Estes D. 2015. The effect of contact with natural environments on positive and negative affect: a meta-analysis. J Posit Psychol. 10(6):507–519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group* P. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 151(4):264–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mostajeran F, Krzikawski J, Steinicke F, Kühn S. 2021. Effects of exposure to immersive videos and photo slideshows of forest and urban environments. Sci Rep. 11(1):1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyle W, Jones C, Dwan T, Petrovich T. 2018. Effectiveness of a virtual reality forest on people with dementia: a mixed methods pilot study. The Gerontologist. 58(3):478–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman M, Gatersleben B, Wyles K, Ratcliffe E. 2022. The use of virtual reality in environment experiences and the importance of realism. J Environ Psychol. 79:101733.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nukarinen T, Rantala J, Korpela K, Browning MH, Istance HO, Surakka V, Raisamo R. 2022. Measures and modalities in restorative virtual natural environments: an integrative narrative review. Comput Human Behav. 126:107008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Meara A, Cassarino M, Bolger A, Setti A. 2020. Virtual reality nature exposure and test anxiety. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction. 4(4):75.
   Google Scholar
• Palanica A, Lyons A, Cooper M, Lee A, Fossat Y. 2019. A comparison of nature and urban environments on creative thinking across different levels of reality. J Environ Psychol. 63:44–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson M, McEwan K, Maratos F, Sheffield D. 2016. Joy and calm: how an evolutionary functional model of affect regulation informs positive emotions in nature. Evolutionary Psychological Science. 2(4):308–320.
   Google Scholar
• Riches S, Azevedo L, Bird L, Pisani S, Valmaggia L. 2021. Virtual reality relaxation for the general population: a systematic review. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 56(10):1707–1727.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riva G, Mantovani F, Capideville CS, Preziosa A, Morganti F, Villani D, Gaggioli A, Botella C, Alcañiz M. 2007. Affective interactions using virtual reality: the link between presence and emotions. Cyber psychol Behav. 10(1):45–56.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roe JJ, Thompson CW, Aspinall PA, Brewer MJ, Duff EI, Miller D, Mitchell R, Clow A. 2013. Green space and stress: evidence from cortisol measures in deprived urban communities. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 10(9):4086–4103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahni P, Kumar J. 2020. Effect of nature experience on fronto-parietal correlates of neurocognitive processes involved in directed attention: an ERP study. Ann Neurosci. 27(3–4):136–147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salamon N, Grimm JM, Horack JM, Newton EK. 2018. Application of virtual reality for crew mental health in extended-duration space missions. Acta Astronaut. 146:117–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schebella MF, Weber D, Schultz L, Weinstein P. 2020. The nature of reality: human stress recovery during exposure to biodiverse, multisensory virtual environments. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 17(1):56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutte NS, Bhullar N, Stilinović EJ, Richardson K. 2017. The impact of virtual environments on restorativeness and affect. Ecopsychology. 9(1):1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Seabrook E, Kelly R, Foley F, Theiler S, Thomas N, Wadley G, Nedeljkovic M. 2020. Understanding how virtual reality can support mindfulness practice: mixed methods study. J Med Internet Res. 22(3):e16106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serrano B, Baños RM, Botella C. 2016. Virtual reality and stimulation of touch and smell for inducing relaxation: a randomized controlled trial. Comput Human Behav. 55:1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith JW. 2015. Immersive virtual environment technology to supplement environmental perception, preference and behavior research: a review with applications. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 12(9):11486–11505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanney K, Fidopiastis C, Foster L. 2020. Virtual reality is sexist: but it does not have to be. Front Robot AI. 7:4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang I-C, Tsai Y-P, Lin Y-J, Chen J-H, Hsieh C-H, Hung S-H, Sullivan WC, Tang H-F, Chang C-Y. 2017. Using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to analyze brain region activity when viewing landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan. 162:137–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanja-Dijkstra K, Pahl S, White MP, Andrade J, May J, Stone RJ, Bruce M, Mills I, Auvray M, Gabe R et al. 2014. Can virtual nature improve patient experiences and memories of dental treatment? A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 15(1):1–9. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-90.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tanja-Dijkstra K, Pahl S, White MP, Auvray M, Stone RJ, Andrade J, May J, Mills I, Moles DR. 2018. The soothing sea: a virtual coastal walk can reduce experienced and recollected pain. Environ Behav. 50(6):599–625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson CW, Roe J, Aspinall P, Mitchell R, Clow A, Miller D. 2012. More green space is linked to less stress in deprived communities: evidence from salivary cortisol patterns. Landsc Urban Plan. 105(3):221–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyrväinen L, Ojala A, Korpela K, Lanki T, Tsunetsugu Y, Kagawa T. 2014. The influence of urban green environments on stress relief measures: a field experiment. J Environ Psychol. 38:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulrich RS. 1983. Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In: Altman I, F. Wohlwill, J. editor. Behavior and the natural environment. Boston: Springer; pp. 85–125.
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich RS. 1984. View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science. 224(4647):420–421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulrich RS, Simons RF, Losito BD, Fiorito E, Miles MA, Zelson M. 1991. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J Environ Psychol. 11(3):201–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valtchanov D. 2010. Physiological and affective responses to immersion in virtual reality: effects of nature and urban settings. J Cyber Ther Rehabil. 3(4):359–374.
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Berg AE, Custers MH. 2011. Gardening promotes neuroendocrine and affective restoration from stress. J Health Psychol. 16(1):3–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Berg AE, Joye Y, Koole SL. 2016. Why viewing nature is more fascinating and restorative than viewing buildings: a closer look at perceived complexity. Urban For Urban Green. 20:397–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Berg AE, Koole SL, van der Wulp NY. 2003. Environmental preference and restoration:(how) are they related? J Environ Psychol. 23(2):135–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaquero-Blasco MA, Perez-Valero E, Morillas C, Lopez-Gordo MA. 2021. Virtual reality customized 360-degree experiences for stress relief. Sensors. 21(6):2219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Rodiek S, Wu C, Chen Y, Li Y. 2016. Stress recovery and restorative effects of viewing different urban park scenes in Shanghai, China. Urban For Urban Green. 15:112–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Shi Y, Zhang B, Chiang Y. 2019. The influence of forest resting environments on stress using virtual reality. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 16(18):3263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson D, Clark L Anna and Tellegen A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White MP, Yeo NL, Vassiljev P, Lundstedt R, Wallergård M, Albin M, Lõhmus M. 2018. A prescription for “nature” – the potential of using virtual nature in therapeutics. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 14:3001–3013. doi:10.2147/NDT.S179038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie J, Luo S, Furuya K, Sun D. 2020. Urban parks as green buffers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability. 12(17):6751.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeo N, White M, Alcock I, Garside R, Dean S, Smalley A, Gatersleben B. 2020. What is the best way of delivering virtual nature for improving mood? An experimental comparison of high definition TV, 360 video, and computer generated virtual reality. J Environ Psychol. 72:101500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin J, Yuan J, Arfaei N, Catalano PJ, Allen JG, Spengler JD. 2020. Effects of biophilic indoor environment on stress and anxiety recovery: a between-subjects experiment in virtual reality. Environ Int. 136:105427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin J, Zhu S, MacNaughton P, Allen JG, Spengler JD. 2018. Physiological and cognitive performance of exposure to biophilic indoor environment. Build Environ. 132:255–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu C-P, Lee H-Y, Lu W-H, Huang Y-C, Browning MH. 2020. Restorative effects of virtual natural settings on middle-aged and elderly adults. Urban For Urban Green. 56:126863.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu C-P, Lee H-Y, Luo X-Y. 2018. The effect of virtual reality forest and urban environments on physiological and psychological responses. Urban For Urban Green. 35:106–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang W, Williams SJ, Wang X, Chen J. 2017. Push and pull factors determine adolescents’ intentions of participation in nature observation: reconnecting local students with nature in China. Appl Environ Educ Commun. 16(4):247–261.
   Google Scholar