| Literature DB >> 32143466 |
Renate Cervinka1,2, Markus Schwab1,2, Daniela Haluza2.
Abstract
Prior research shows that forests contribute to human health and well-being. In this sense, this cross-sectional case study, adopting the principles of citizen science, assessed the restorative potential of places in the Hallerwald, an Austrian community forest. A convenience sample of adult forest visitors (n = 99, 64% females) completed a survey during a guided 2.5 h forest tour. The German questionnaire assessed the qualities of defined places in the forest. We also investigated changes in mood states, perceived stress, restoration, connectedness, and mindfulness before and after visiting the forest. In cooperation with a local working group, we developed the new Widen One's Mind (WOM) scale, which showed good scale characteristics. All places received high scores in their potential to increase restoration and vitality and to widen one's mind. Positive affect, restoration, connectedness with nature and the forest, and mindfulness increased pre- versus post-visits, whereas negative affect and perceived stress decreased. The findings of this study suggest that in recreational forests, visitors experience beneficial mental effects such as stress reduction in addition to physical exercise. To facilitate regional development goals, we recommend evaluating places in forests regarding the potential effects on the health and well-being as well as citizen participation before initiating extensive remodeling.Entities:
Keywords: citizen science; green care; green public health; regional development; restorativeness; widen one’s mind scale
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32143466 PMCID: PMC7084420 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17051676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Impressions of the selected places in the forest: (a) Mossy stones (A in the map); (b) Fern glade (B); (c) Outlook (C); (d) Forest glade (D); (e) Start/end of the forest path (S); (f) Map of the places.
Qualities of the places and the forest.
| Scores | (A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (A–D) Total Forest | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| Perceived restorativeness potential | 7.34 C,D | 1.42 | 7.70 C,D | 1.41 | 6.15 A,B | 1.69 | 6.65 A,B | 1.74 | 6.96 | 1.11 |
| Vitality | 6.08 | 1.99 | 5.79 | 2.15 | 5.90 | 2.17 | 6.29 | 2.08 | 6.03 | 1.66 |
| Widen One’s Mind | 7.67 B,C | 1.40 | 8.05 A,C,D | 1.38 | 6.69 A,B,D | 1.94 | 7.54 B,C | 1.55 | 7.49 | 1.16 |
Note: SD: standard deviation; A, B, C, D significant post-hoc comparisons (p < 0.05, Bonferroni corrected) for the places (A) Mossy stones, (B) Fern glade, (C) Outlook, (D) Forest glade.
Participants’ feelings and perceptions pre- and post-visit.
| Scores | Pre-visit | Post-visit | p 1 | Effect Size | Change (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | ||||
| Positive affect | 59.01 | 18.83 | 69.40 | 17.02 | <0.001 | 0.58 a | −10.39 |
| Negative affect | 14.11 | 18.15 | 5.23 | 10.46 | <0.001 | 0.59 b | 8.88 |
| Perceived stress | 75.92 | 26.41 | 21.16 | 12.52 | <0.001 | 2.52 b | 54.76 |
| Perceived restoration | 61.05 | 20.32 | 85.74 | 10.66 | <0.001 | 1.5 a | −24.68 |
| Connectedness with nature | 59.61 | 23.55 | 68.77 | 22.05 | <0.001 | 0.4 a | −9.16 |
| Connectedness with forest | 29.51 | 26.71 | 50.53 | 27.45 | <0.001 | 0.77 a | −21.02 |
| Mindfulness | 55.36 | 15.03 | 61.89 | 14.87 | <0.001 | 0.44 a | −6.53 |
Notes: SD: standard deviation; 1 p values from t-tests; a Hedge’s g av (a) and b Hedge’s g rm (b); POMP-transformed scores.
Factor analysis of the Widen One’s Mind (WOM) scale at the places and the forest.
| A) | B) | C) | D) Forest Glade | A-D) Total Forest | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| At this place one can | ||||||||||
| let thoughts wander. | 0.49 | 0.24 | 0.70 | 0.49 | 0.83 | 0.69 | 0.78 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 0.49 |
| focus on the essentials. | 0.86 | 0.75 | 0.84 | 0.71 | 0.79 | 0.62 | 0.86 | 0.73 | 0.90 | 0.80 |
| gain a new perspective. | 0.80 | 0.63 | 0.84 | 0.71 | 0.87 | 0.77 | 0.88 | 0.78 | 0.92 | 0.84 |
| come to terms with oneself. | 0.83 | 0.69 | 0.82 | 0.67 | 0.88 | 0.78 | 0.81 | 0.66 | 0.89 | 0.79 |
| rearrange thoughts. | 0.81 | 0.65 | 0.73 | 0.53 | 0.92 | 0.85 | 0.79 | 0.62 | 0.75 | 0.56 |
| come up with new ideas. | 0.65 | 0.42 | 0.76 | 0.58 | 0.84 | 0.71 | 0.61 | 0.38 | 0.87 | 0.76 |
|
| ||||||||||
| KMO | 0.858 | 0.858 | 0.915 | 0.857 | 0.881 | |||||
| Eigenvalue | 3.375 | 3.692 | 4.420 | 3.775 | 4.248 | |||||
| % of variance explained | 65.24 | 61.53 | 73.70 | 62.92 | 70.79 | |||||
Note: fl: factor loadings; h2: communalities; KMO: Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin Measure of sampling adequacy.