CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 258Museums and Cultural HeritageUrban Green Space and HealthAesthetic Perception and Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Museum as a Restorative Environment

Open access
Kaplan, Stephen, Bardwell, Lisa V., Slakter, Deborah B.·1993·Environment and Behavior
DOI 10.1177/0013916593256004
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Museums seem to be ideal environments for a restorative experience. A collection of objects both aesthetic and fascinating would seem appropriate for aiding the recovery of directed attention, and perhaps for reflection as well. Yet, according to anecdotal reports, museums often seem tedious and tiring. The authors explore this apparent paradox both theoretically, in the context of attention restoration theory, and empirically. Study 1, a content analysis of material generated by focus groups for a Getty Foundation study, yielded categories remarkably consistent with the theorized components. For Study 2, 124 museum visitors completed surveys on restorative aspects of their visit. As with Study 1, results point to the restorative potential of the museum, but suggest that those who are already comfortable in museums are more likely to receive this benefit.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0013916593256004

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Gilker, C. M. (1992). Views to nature: Effect on attentional capacity. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
  2. James, W., 1962, Psychology: The briefer course
  3. Kaplan, R., 1989, The experience of nature: A psychological perspective
  4. Walsh, A., 1991, Insights: Museums visitors attitudes expectations (A focus group experiment)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–258 of 258

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kaplan, S., Bardwell, L. V., & Slakter, D. B.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Venue
Environment and Behavior
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1993-11
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
725-742
ISSN
  • 0013-9165 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-390X
DOI
10.1177/0013916593256004
OpenAlex
W2094309305
Cited by
255
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
FWCI
43.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Environment and Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Museology › Museums and Cultural Heritage
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Green Space and Health
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
Keywords
museums, restorative environments, attention restoration theory, directed attention, museum visitors, visitor experience, visitor comfort

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review