Abstract
Existing studies have demonstrated the restorative benefits of being in forests. However, most studies have designed participants to engage individually in forest walking and viewing, which neglects the social aspect of conversation. Researchers suggested that social context should be studied in order to have a better understanding how forests foster human health. To this end, we examined the role of social context using three types of forest therapy programs: a guided program, a self-guided program, and a walk alone program. A between-subject, pretest–posttest field experimental design was employed to evaluate restorative effects by measuring the physiological responses and mood states incurred in different forest therapy programs. Our findings showed, that the walk alone group exhibited a significant systolic blood pressure decrease and a significant increase in sympathetic nervous activity; the self-guided group showed a significant increase in heart rate values and significant decreases in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure; and the guided group revealed a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure. Further, the three forest therapy programs had positive effects on improving mood states, except a nonsignificant vigor–activity increase in the walk alone group. The three programs did not exhibit significant differences in changes of restorative benefits in physiological and psychological measures except for a significant difference in changes in sympathetic nervous activity between the walk alone group and guided group. The results showed the restorative benefits of forest therapy are apparent regardless of the program type. The management team should continue promoting forest therapy for public health by providing different types of forest therapy programs and experiences.
Highlights
A participant having followed a guided forest therapy activity in a previous study provided this feedback: “the guide was professional and excellent, sometimes I felt he was interrupting my connection with the forest.”. This intriguing feedback inspired the following question: “when promoting forest therapy, should we encourage people to experience forests alone or with a guide?” In other words, “does a guided program enhance the restorative benefits of forest therapy?” is an interesting and practical question in the study of forest therapy that remains unanswered because of a lack of evidence supporting or contradicting it. In this exploratory study we examined the role of social context using three types of forest therapy programs: a guided program, a self-guided program, and a walk alone program supported by the Experimental Forest of National
This study was conducted in the Xitou Nature Education Area (XNEA), Taiwan which is managed by the Experimental Forest of National Taiwan University
G group exhibited a significant all three groups is consistent with thedecrease findingsinofSBP
Summary
Convergent evidence indicates connecting with natural environments, such as forests, has proven to be an effective approach to reduce mental health symptoms and physiological stress [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. The amount of scientific evidence highlighting the health benefits of interacting with nature is continually increasing. Song, and Ikei [9] discussed nature therapy as an intervention to prevent negative health outcomes via increasing physiological relaxation and strengthening the immune system. Immersion in natural environments helps to reduce stress levels and improve immune response, suggesting nature therapy can improve an individual’s resistance to disease.
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
