Abstract
Research on restorative environments has showed the healthy outcomes of nature experience, though often by comparing attractive natural to unattractive built environments. Some studies indeed showed the restorative value of artistic/historical settings. In a quasi-experimental study involving 125 participants in Rome, Italy, a natural and a built/historical environment, both scoring high in restorative properties, were evaluated in a natural, built/historical, or neutral setting. In accordance with the Biophilia hypothesis and the Attention Restoration Theory (ART), we hypothesized: a higher restorative potential of nature also when compared to built/historical environments; a moderation effect of on-site experience on perceived restorative potential (PRP) of both environmental typologies; higher levels of restorative properties of the environment for on-site vs. not on-site respondents; and a mediation effect of the restorative properties of the environment in the relationship between time spent on-site and PRP. Results supported the hypotheses. In addition, different psychological processes leading to restoration emerged for the natural and the built/historical environment. Theoretical implications for ART and practical applications for an integrative urban design with natural and historical elements are discussed.
Highlights
Contact with nature has been widely recognized to promote health and well-being (Bratman et al, 2012; Hartig et al, 2014)
The two theories share an evolutionary approach rooted in the Biophilia hypothesis (Kellert and Wilson, 1993), which postulated that human beings have developed an innate tendency to positively respond to natural environments for adaptation reasons, because nature is the environment in which they evolved
It can contribute to gain a better understanding of the restoration processes occurring in natural and built/historical environments
Summary
Contact with nature has been widely recognized to promote health and well-being (Bratman et al, 2012; Hartig et al, 2014). The two theories share an evolutionary approach rooted in the Biophilia hypothesis (Kellert and Wilson, 1993), which postulated that human beings have developed an innate tendency to positively respond to natural environments for adaptation reasons, because nature is the environment in which they evolved. Both ART and SRT stressed the role of attention and low levels of stress for. Empirical evidence supporting the cognitive and affective benefits of contact with nature has been widely provided (Ulrich et al, 1991; Hartig et al, 2003; Herzog et al, 2003; Laumann et al, 2003; Staats et al, 2003; van den Berg et al, 2003; Kaplan and Berman, 2010)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
