Search

University students are likely to encounter mental health issues throughout their educational journey. Among the various factors that can impact students’ wellbeing, the physical environment can potentially restore cognitive, physiological, and emotional resources, thereby enhancing academic performance, and overall quality of life, while reducing feelings of stress and depression. The Perceived Restorativeness Scale is the most commonly used tool to assess the level of restorativeness derived from the educational physical environment. However, a tailored measure could be a more psychometrically suitable approach to capture the context-specific characteristics of university environments for academic students. This study aimed to validate an instrument that can accurately evaluate university spaces to measure the perceived restorativeness of university students. A total sample of 685 students from two Italian universities participated in the evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Restorativeness at University scale (Rest@US), consisting of 13 items divided into four dimensions: fascination, being-away, scope, and coherence. The hypothesised four-factor model (being-away, fascination, scope, and coherence) demonstrated excellent fit indices in both the calibration and validation samples and was invariant for sex. The scale demonstrates good reliability. Furthermore, criterion validity has been confirmed, highlighting that, in a theoretically consistent manner, the perceived restorativeness of university physical environments from the point of view of students and its dimensions were negatively correlated with techno-overload and study-related workload and positively correlated with perceived performance and psycho-physical wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, there has been an increasing volume of research aimed out quantifying the extent to which the natural environment can assist in restoring mental, emotional, and physical well-being. It is commonly assumed that natural environments are more restorative than urban environments. However, studies addressing this issue use a variety of methods for data collection making it difficult to compare the findings of different studies. The research reported here uses a meta-analysis aimed at estimating how much natural environments are perceived as being more restorative than urban environments. We investigated the role of moderator variables such as research design, kind of natural environment, participants, measurement instruments used or the context in which the data were collected. PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Scopus, SpringerLINK, Web of Science online databases were used to identity all peer-review articles on restorativeness published to date (k = 167). Reference sections of obtained papers were examined for additional studies. Only 22 studies met inclusion criteria (direct exposure to environment, comparison between one outdoor environment with natural element and one without natural element, and restorativeness measured by self-report scale) and were included in meta-analysis. Results show that natural environments are perceived to be more restorative than urban environments (Cohen's d (confidence interval) = 1.99 (1.38–2.61)). Significant heterogeneity between the study was found (Q (19) = 503.16, p <.001) and variability within studies was very high (I 2 = 97%). However, subsequent univariate moderator analyses were not significant. Other methodological differences (e.g., lighting conditions) could explain this variability. We concluded that the variability in studies is more likely to be due to individual differences (e.g., age, connections to nature, and environmental attitude) than the methodological differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cultural capital refers to the knowledge and use of cultural codes that are relevant in the community wherein people live. A valid scale to measure all the dimensions of cultural capital is not available. In this paper, exploratory, confirmatory, and multigroup confirmatory factor analyses were performed using independent samples of adults to select the best items and to investigate their factorial structure and invariance across sex and occupation prestige. We found three interrelated factors made up of 14 items: participating in groups and associations, consuming cultural events, and carrying out activities requiring expertise or creativity. This three-factor model exhibited partial factor mean invariance for sex and partial factor variance/covariance invariance for occupational prestige and convergent/divergent validity for measures of bonding and bridging social capital. The Scale of Cultural Capital is a useful tool for assessing the cultural capital in experimental and professional settings and for developing an evidence-based theoretical model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]