The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments
Open accessAbstract
Background: There is increasing interest in the potential role of the natural environment in human health and well-being. However, the evidence-base for specific and direct health or well-being benefits of activity within natural compared to more synthetic environments has not been systematically assessed. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to collate and synthesise the findings of studies that compare measurements of health or well-being in natural and synthetic environments. Effect sizes of the differences between environments were calculated and meta-analysis used to synthesise data from studies measuring similar outcomes. Results: Twenty-five studies met the review inclusion criteria. Most of these studies were crossover or controlled trials that investigated the effects of short-term exposure to each environment during a walk or run. This included 'natural' environments, such as public parks and green university campuses, and synthetic environments, such as indoor and outdoor built environments. The most common outcome measures were scores of different self-reported emotions. Based on these data, a meta-analysis provided some evidence of a positive benefit of a walk or run in a natural environment in comparison to a synthetic environment. There was also some support for greater attention after exposure to a natural environment but not after adjusting effect sizes for pretest differences. Meta-analysis of data on blood pressure and cortisol concentrations found less evidence of a consistent difference between environments across studies. Conclusions: Overall, the studies are suggestive that natural environments may have direct and positive impacts on well-being, but support the need for investment in further research on this question to understand the general significance for public health.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Although a previous meta-analysis has been published that examined whether exposure to natural environments has a positive impact on health and well-being (Bowler et al., 2010)”
From The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: a meta-analysis (2014) · cites this paper as Bowler et al., 2010
In the citing paper
“For example, exposure to natural environments decreases stress, increases happiness, improves mood, and restores attention (Berto, 2005; Bowler, Buyung-Ali, Knight, & Pullin, 2010; White, Alcock, Wheeler, & Depledge, 2013).”
From Behavioral trainings and manipulations to reduce delay discounting: A systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as Bowler, Buyung-Ali, Knight, & Pullin, 2010
In the citing paper
“Natural spaces have been shown to provide individuals with well-being benefits [47]”
From Understanding How Virtual Reality Can Support Mindfulness Practice: Mixed Methods Study (2020) · cites this paper as [47]
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
The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework
Kaplan, S. (1995) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2 · Cited by 6,923 · cited 1×
“This is postulated to occur through restorative qualities of the environment that promote feelings of ‘being away’ from routine activities and thoughts and ‘soft fascination’ with features in the natural environment that attract attention without requiring effort [14].”
BackgroundPromoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review
Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli‐Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemelä, J. K., & James, P. (2007) · Landscape and Urban Planning · doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.001 · Cited by 2,894
The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature.
Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02225.x · Cited by 2,535 · cited 8×
“Eight studies investigated effects on attention/concentration (including two studies that focused specifically on ratings of ADD/ADHD symptoms of children; see “Methodology”) [32,34,35,41,42,48,49].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialAesthetic and affective response to natural environment
Ulrich, R. S. (1983) · Behavior and the Natural Environment · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_4 · Cited by 2,241
Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings
Hartig, T., Evans, G. W., Jamner, L. D., Davis, D. S., & Gärling, T. (2003) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0272-4944(02)00109-3 · Cited by 2,118 · cited 10×
“Eight studies investigated effects on attention/concentration (including two studies that focused specifically on ratings of ADD/ADHD symptoms of children; see “Methodology”) [32,34,35,41,42,48,49].”
BackgroundInfluentialThomas, B. H., Ciliska, D., Dobbins, M., & Micucci, S. (2004) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1524-475x.2004.04006.x · Cited by 2,118 · cited 1×
“A methodology quality checklist was devised, guided by items from an available quality assessment tool [25].”
MethodEffect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: an observational population study
Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61689-x · Cited by 2,099
Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation?
Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., Groenewegen, P. P., de Vries, S., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2006) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2005.043125 · Cited by 1,976 · cited 1×
“Cross-sectional studies have suggested positive relationships between green space and health [16,17]; however, identifying the causal pathway can be complex.”
BackgroundRestorative Effects of Natural Environment Experiences
Hartig, T., Mang, M., & Evans, G. W. (1991) · Environment and Behavior · doi:10.1177/0013916591231001 · Cited by 1,700 · cited 9×
“The most common study participants were college/university students [30-32,35,37,38,40,41,44,46,47] and physically active individuals such as backpackers, regular runners or athletes [32,39,42-45].”
BackgroundInfluentialBarton, J., & Pretty, J. (2010) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es903183r · Cited by 1,592 · cited 1×
“combined data from a range of different green exercise programs found consistent positive benefits [12].”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Kaplan R, Kaplan S: The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. 1989, New York, Cambridge University Press
- Scholz U, Krombholz H: A study of the physical performance ability of children from wood kindergartens and from regular kindergartens. Motorik Mar. 2007, 1: 17-22.
- Peacock J, Hine R, Pretty J: The mental health benefits of green exercise activities and green care. 2007, Report for MIND
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182443 · Cited by 3,638
“More recently, methodological heterogeneity led other reviewers (11) to include only 3–6 studies in quantitative syntheses for each of several outcomes.”
BackgroundExploring pathways linking greenspace to health: theoretical and methodological guidance
Markevych, I., Schoierer, J., Hartig, T., Chudnovsky, A., Hystad, P., Dzhambov, A. M., de Vries, S., Triguero-Mas, M., Brauer, M., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., et al. (2017) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2017.06.028 · Cited by 2,543
“In recent years, meta-analyses of effect estimates from such experimental studies (Bowler et al., 2010b; Ohly et al., 2016) have yielded evidence both in line and at odds with each theory and with the results of individual studies, raising questions not least about the suitability of the measures…”
BackgroundResultNature and mental health: An ecosystem service perspective
Bratman, G. N., Anderson, C. B., Berman, M. G., Cochran, B., de Vries, S., Flanders, J., Folke, C., Frumkin, H., Gross, J. J., Hartig, T., et al. (2019) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aax0903 · Cited by 2,001
Twohig-Bennett, C., & Jones, A. (2018) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.030 · Cited by 1,766
“, 2011), improved attention, as well as greater satisfaction, enjoyment and a greater intent to repeat the activity (Bowler et al., 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialContributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda
Daniel, T. C., Muhar, A., Arnberger, A., Aznar, O., Boyd, J. W., Chan, K. M. A., Costanza, R., Elmqvist, T., Flint, C. G., Gobster, P. H., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1114773109 · Cited by 1,642
Metadata
- Authors
- Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L. M., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S.
- Affiliations
- Bangor University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pullin, Andrew S
- Venue
- BMC Public Health
- Published
- 2010-08-04
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 456-456
- ISSN
- 1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2924288
- OpenAlex
- W2115180584
- Cited by
- 1,993
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 108 · 2025: 146 · 2024: 206 · 2023: 172 · 2022: 176 · 2021: 184 · 2020: 227 · 2019: 167 · 2018: 138 · 2017: 103 · 2016: 112 · 2015: 80 · 2014: 78 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 3.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Natural England
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Green Space and Health
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Acoustics and Ultrasonics › Noise Effects and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Physical Activity and Health
- Keywords
- natural environment, synthetic environments, built environment, well-being, self-reported emotion, attention, blood pressure, cortisol, walking, running, green spaces, public parks, urban green space, nature exposure
- MeSH terms
- Health Status, Humans, Personal Satisfaction, Nature
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
