CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 49Outdoor and Experiential EducationUrban Green Space and HealthRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management

Feeling at home in the wilderness: environmental conditions, well-being and aesthetic experience

Open access
Løvoll, Helga Synnevåg, Sæther, Knut-Willy, Graves, Mark·2020·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00402PMC PMC7082929
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Environmental conditions affect one’s aesthetic experience in natural environments. Understanding that effect requires accounting for the conditions affecting one’s attention and experience. Rather than attempt to reduce and control environmental factors, we compare two similar groups during naturally occurring, intense and overwhelming conditions and examine the relationship between common characteristics as well as environment and group differences. Participants undertook a five-day, winter, wilderness adventure training course designed to challenge their considerable wilderness and leadership skills under two different extreme weather conditions but within the same wilderness area (n=47 full participation). In addition to pre- and post-adventure questionnaires, participants responded daily during the wilderness experience to briefly describe a self-selected, strong experience of nature; characterize its associated feeling states; and answer questions probing eight aesthetic aspects of the experience. Participant strong experience of nature related to hedonic and eudaimonic feelings in different ways depending upon environmental conditions. In particular, strong correlations occurred between agreement ratings with “I felt at home in nature” daily experience reports and satisfaction with life and personal growth trait measures, but primarily during sunny and cold conditions on a high plateau (PG: Pearson r=.51; SWL: r=.70) and not significantly in stormy and wet weather in a mountain forest. In addition, experience narratives that correspond to strongest agreement to feeling at home in nature were examined for shared themes and synthesized into six dimensions: focus on sensory experiences at a particular moment, self-reflection, wonder, appreciation of beauty, positive emotions, and insight of relation to nature. These findings actualize the notion of wonder, aroused by sudden feelings or by reflection, as a salient ingredient in feeling at home in wilderness. The finding of feeling at home in nature, as the most important feature relating to feelings and well-being, is discussed in relation to self-awareness, philosophical thinking, and potential ethical awareness.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00402

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Løvoll et al. (2020) point out that there is a significant positive correlation between tourists' positive perception of the destination environment, such as beauty, comfort and naturalness, and their hedonic and eudaimonic feelings.

    “Furthermore, Løvoll et al. (2020) point out that there is a significant positive correlation between tourists’ positive perception of the destination environment, such as beauty, comfort and naturalness, and their hedonic and eudaimonic feelings.”

    From A study on the influence of rural tourism’s perceived destination restorative qualities on loyalty based on SOR model (2025) · cites this paper as Løvoll et al., 2020

    Table 2 in Results > Correlations reports significant positive correlations between several aesthetic nature experiences, including beautiful scenery and feeling at home in nature, and both hedonic and eudaimonic feelings. But the study concerns wilderness-expedition participants, not tourists’ perceptions of a destination; it does not report comfort or naturalness as measured perceptions. Some correlations also differ by environmental condition and are not significant in both groups. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In a quiet and close-to-nature environment, it is easier for visitors to engage in inner thinking and self-examination, thereby reassessing life goals, values and their own potential, and enhancing the realization experience.

    “In the quiet and close-to-nature environment, it is easier for visitors to engage in inner thinking and self-examination, thereby reassessing life goals, values and their own potential, and enhancing the realization experience (Løvoll et al., 2020; Ding and Xu, 2024).”

    From A study on the influence of rural tourism’s perceived destination restorative qualities on loyalty based on SOR model (2025) · cites this paper as Løvoll et al., 2020

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says wilderness offers room for silence and contemplation, and the Discussion describes self-reflection and insight into one’s relationship with nature. The Discussion also discusses reorienting life goals and values in connection with awe, but the paper does not establish that quiet surroundings make such reassessment easier or that it enhances a realization experience or recognition of one’s potential. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Carlson A. (1998). “ Nature: contemporary thoughts,” in Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, Vol. 3 ed. Kelly M. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 346– 349.
  2. Carlson A. (2000). Aesthetics and the Environment: The Appreciation of Nature, Art and Architecture. London: Routledge.
  3. Ledley F. D. (2009). “ Visions of a source of wonder,” in Envisioning Nature, Science, and Religion, ed. Proctor J. D. (West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Press), 245– 270.
  4. Sæther K.-W. (2019). “ Aesthetics at the intersection of science, ethics and theology,” in Our Common Universe: Exploring the Future of Science, Ethics and Theology, eds Lehmann Z. Losch A. (London: Bloomsbury/T&T Clark series), 109– 124.
  5. Seel M. (1998). “ Nature: aesthetics of nature and ethics,” in Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, Vol. 3 ed. Kelly M. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 341– 343.
  6. Tomlin A. (2008). “ Introduction,” in Aesthetic Experience, eds Shusterman R. Tomlin A. (New York, NY: Routledge), 1– 13.
  7. Vasalou S. (ed.) (2012). Practices of Wonder: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications.
  8. Vittersø J. Dyrdal G. M. Røysamb E. (2005). Utilities and Capabilities: A Psychological Account of the Two Concepts and Their Relation to the Idea of a Good Life. Bicocca, Italy: Paper presented at Workshop on Capabilities and Happiness.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Løvoll, H. S., Sæther, K.-W., & Graves, M.
Affiliations
  • Volda University College (NO)
  • Fuller Theological Seminary (US)
Corresponding author
Sæther, Knut-Willy
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2020-03-13
Volume
11
Pages
402-402
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00402
PMC
PMC7082929
OpenAlex
W3011077335
Cited by
49
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 12
FWCI
7.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Outdoor and Experiential Education
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Keywords
aesthetic experience, wilderness experience, environmental factors, extreme weather events, well-being, hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, life satisfaction, personal growth, wonder, self-reflection, sensory experience, self-awareness

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