Search

Accumulating evidence indicates that time spent in natural environments promotes creativity, but few researchers have considered how this occurs. We evaluate two candidate mechanisms, attention restoration and mind wandering. We compare the accounts in terms of attentional focus, brain network activation, cognitive effects, and the temporal progression of these processes across the stages of creativity. Based on this analysis, we propose that (1) gentle shifts between externally oriented soft fascination and internally oriented mind wandering can occur during nature experience; (2) this provides the basis for mutually reinforcing pathways that enhance attention control following nature experience; and (3) mind wandering might support additional benefits for creativity, including flexibility and new associations of ideas. We propose research to test the proposed pathways, including the conditions under which environments influence creativity, the ebb and flow of attention orientation during environmental experience, and the links between attentional focus, brain network activation and creativity.

Research indicates that heightened individual engagement in nature can improve psychological benefits of nature experiences, yet the current literature lacks robust consideration for how this occurs. Constrained nature experiences – such as busy, noisy urban environments – may undermine individual capacities to engage with nature, prompting the question of how engagement functions across different nature experiences. To address this gap, we draw on mindfulness as a framework to examine the pathways in which engagement in nature supports psychological restoration and connection with nature. We appraise existing literature and identify three key mechanisms underpinning mindful engagement in nature: perceptual sensitivity, decentering, and non-reactivity. This new framework provides a basis to examine mindful engagement in constrained nature experiences, where we find that the self-regulatory mechanisms of mindful engagement have a more direct role in supporting outcomes.

Most studies on psychological restoration and favorite places have addressed restoration in green or blue outdoor settings whereas the interest around built and indoor settings has been scarce. In this study, we analyzed restorative experiences in favorite indoor and outdoor urban places using a top-down approach by including psycho-environmental variables (nature and urban orientedness, place bonding) and personality traits (Big Five). A sample of 945 university students and staff recruited in 5 western countries (Finland, Spain, The Netherlands, UK and Australia) answered an online questionnaire. In the linear regression models, perceived restorative potential, place attachment and place identification were the strongest predictors of subjective restoration. Personality traits did not play a significant role in restorative experiences. This work extends restoration research by considering the role of indoor, as well as outdoor environments and highlights the role of certain top-down characteristics in restorative experiences.

Australian cities have been slow to implement green roofs. This is because there are many potential barriers to their widely acceptance as a nature based solution that can make cities more liveable and help them adapt to, and mitigate, climate change. Due to significant differences in rainfall, temperature, available substrates and suitable vegetation relying on northern hemisphere research and experience is problematic as many of the environmental and economic benefits of green roofs are location specific. This paper aims to 1. Synthesise a decade of Australian green roof research that has sought to overcome these barriers, 2. Assess the current status of the Australian green roof industry and remaining knowledge gaps, and 3. Provide a roadmap for future progress developed in multidisciplinary industry workshops. Many of these insights will be applicable to areas with similar seasonally hot and dry climates or emerging green roof markets. We identified that significant progress has been made in addressing the barriers to green roofs in Australia. Research has focused on developing green roofs for local conditions and quantifying their benefits. Substrate research has investigated the suitability of locally available materials with a focus on how water retention additives and organic waste materials can increase plant available water and therefore survival. By taking a plant physiology approach Australian researchers have gained a strong functional understanding of suitable green roof plants and the benefits they provide, considerably expanding the available palette beyond the succulents commonly used internationally. Research has quantified green roofs’ stormwater retention and building insulation and energy benefits and provided evidence that they benefit well-being and performance, important for employee productivity.

Based on attention restoration theory we proposed that micro-breaks spent viewing a city scene with a flowering meadow green roof would boost sustained attention. Sustained attention is crucial in daily life and underlies successful cognitive functioning. We compared the effects of 40-s views of two different city scenes on 150 university students' sustained attention. Participants completed the task at baseline, were randomly assigned to view a flowering meadow green roof or a bare concrete roof, and completed the task again at post-treatment. Participants who briefly viewed the green roof made significantly lower omission errors, and showed more consistent responding to the task compared to participants who viewed the concrete roof. We argue that this reflects boosts to sub-cortical arousal and cortical attention control. Our results extend attention restoration theory by providing direct experimental evidence for the benefits of micro-breaks and for city green roofs.

Living, or green roofs, are increasingly built in cities for their environmental benefits, however there is little evidence about how to maximise their aesthetic appeal. Because preferences for landscapes can be determined by vegetation characteristics we surveyed the preferences of 274 Australian office workers using 40 living roof images which systematically manipulated plant life-form, foliage colour, flowering, diversity and height. These preferences were compared to those for a bare concrete roof. The potential restorativeness of the most preferred living roof and the concrete roof were also assessed. Results showed that all living roofs were preferred over the concrete roof; however preferences differed according to vegetation characteristics. The most preferred and restorative living roof had taller, green, grassy and flowering vegetation, while lower-growing red succulent vegetation was least preferred. Participants preferred a productive landscape, with green foliage and flowering consistently preferred. Participants with a stronger connection to nature consistently assigned higher preferences to taller, compared to lower-growing, vegetation. Increasing diversity was associated with higher preferences overall, but decreasing preferences for highly preferred vegetation. This research makes an important contribution to understanding employee preferences in the unique context of urban living roof landscapes.

While a relatively small body of research links green roofs to psychological benefits such as aesthetic enjoyment and improved concentration, these outcomes are becoming important objectives in green roof design. Claims regarding benefits of green roofs are therefore often derived from research on psychological benefits of ground-level urban greenspaces. Compared with other urban landscapes, green roofs have limited space and accessibility, reducing the opportunity for physical exercise and the opportunity for larger masses of vegetation, particularly trees. Given these differences, there is a risk that the psychological benefits of green roofs are overstated or may only apply to a subset of green roof designs. Guidance for designing green roofs for psychological benefits may also be misleading if it fails to consider the unique green roof context. To address these challenges, we review research on psychological benefits of green roofs through a social-ecological lens on human-environment interactions. We consider how experiences of green roofs arise from an interaction between characteristics of the physical environment (including characteristics of green roof vegetation, wind patterns, and surrounding buildings), social climate (including social factors influencing access and use, and social norms for nature in cities), activities that can be undertaken on a green roof (such as exercise, socialisation, rest and relaxation), and individual resources and adaptation (for example, prior mood and opportunities to change environments to support individual needs). We explore how these factors interact with each other and with broader natural, built and socio-cultural systems that might encourage or inhibit opportunities to view, access, and enjoy green roofs. We conclude with recommendations regarding how green roofs can be designed to promote psychological benefits and identify future research needs.

BACKGROUND: Expanded carrier screening (ECS) is routinely offered to patients seeking fertility treatment. ECS provides an abundance of information for patients, which may inform reproductive decisions. However this volume of information may be perceived as causing anxiety, particularly for individuals identified as carriers. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the effect of ECS results on patients identified as carriers compared to non-carriers. MATERIALS & METHODS: Patients who underwent ECS were sent a survey 3 weeks after results were reported. Post-test genetic counseling (GC) was offered to all patients. Consenting participants were asked to report 1) with whom they discussed their results and 2) how often they felt a number of emotions post-test. Responses were compared between carriers and noncarriers. RESULTS: 420 patients completed the survey and were eligible for analysis. 178 were identified as carriers (42%). Post-test GC was received by 158 (89%) of carriers. When asked to report with whom they discussed results, carriers were significantly more likely to have discussed results with family members (p 1⁄4 0.0003). Among both carriers and non-carriers, most participants reported not discussing their results with a primary care provider/other medical professional. When reporting on emotions felt post-test, carriers felt anxious, nervous, and a loss of control significantly more often than non-carriers (p1⁄45.689e-05; Fisher p1⁄4 0.0005). While the difference here was significant, the overall frequency of feeling said emotions was low; the large majority of both carriers and non-carriers felt this way rarely/never. CONCLUSIONS: It is expected that carriers may feel anxiety regarding their results. However, even among carriers, the majority reported feeling these emotions rarely/never. This may be due to post-test GC. The benefit of ECS pairedwith GC extended to participants’ families, as carriers reported discussing results with their family members. Participants reported not discussing their results with other medical professionals. The clinical impact of this is important; despite discussing their results with a genetics professional, carriers may feel anxiety regarding how their carrier status affects other areas of their health. These emotions could be mitigated by the sharing of results with other healthcare providers. Future studies around facilitation of such discussions and the impact of post-test genetic counseling will be important, as will implementation of pre-test counseling for patients undergoing screening. FINANCIAL SUPPORT: Kumar, Yarnall, and Lee are employees of Recombine.