An Update of the Literature Supporting the Well-Being Benefits of Plants: A Review of the Emotional and Mental Health Benefits of Plants

Abstract

Consumers have historically shown an inclination to purchase plants that enhance their quality of life, meaning they will purchase items that positively influence their social, physical, psychological, cognitive, environmental, and spiritual well-being. Plants in native and improved landscapes (and interiorscapes) have been documented to influence each of six quality of life constructs. This paper summarizes publications regarding the emotional and mental health benefits associated with plants, addressing reduced anxiety and stress, attention deficit recovery, fractals and visual response, decreased depression, enhanced memory retention, greater happiness and life satisfaction, mitigation of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), increased creativity, enhanced productivity and attention, reduced effects of dementia, and improved self-esteem. This research should be strategically incorporated into both industry-wide and firm-specific marketing messages that highlight the quality of life value proposition in order to maintain the industry's sense of value and relevance to consumers of the future.
Index words: benefits of plants, emotional health, mental health.

Full text

An Update of the Literature Supporting the Well-Being
Bene¢ts of Plants: A Review of the Emotional and Mental
Health Bene¢ts of Plants
1
Charles Hall and Melinda Knuth
2
Abstract
Consumers have historically shown an inclination to purchase plants that enhance their quality of life, meaning they will purchase
items that positively influence their social, physical, psychological, cognitive, environmental, and spiritual well-being. Plants in
native and improved landscapes (and interiorscapes) have been documented to influence each of six quality of life constructs. This
paper summarizes publications regarding the emotional and mental health benefits associated with plants, addressing reduced anxiety
and stress, attention deficit recovery, fractals and visual response, decreased depression, enhanced memory retention, greater
happiness and life satisfaction, mitigation of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), increased creativity, enhanced productivity and
attention, reduced effects of dementia, and improved self-esteem. This research should be strategically incorporated into both
industry-wide and firm-specific marketing messages that highlight the quality of life value proposition in order to maintain the
industry’s sense of value and relevance to consumers of the future.
Index words: benefits of plants, emotional health, mental health.
Significance to the Horticulture Industry
This paper is the first of a four-part series that provides a
review of the substantial body of peer-reviewed research
that has been conducted regarding the economic, environ-
mental, and health and well-being benefits of green
industry products and services. This article focuses
specifically on the health and well-being benefits. This
research should be strategically incorporated into both
industry-wide and firm-specific marketing messages that
highlight these quality of life dimensions in order to
enhance the perceived value and relevance of green
industry products for gardening and landscaping consumers
in the future.
Introduction
In 2011, Hall and Dickson published a forum article in
the Journal of Environmental Horticulture (JEH) that
summarized the economic, environmental, and health and
well-being benefits associated with people-plant interac-
tions. The proposition put forth in that article was that
green industry firms needed to focus on these types of
functional benefits in their marketing messages to con-
sumers rather than simply base their value proposition on
the features and benefits of the plants themselves (e.g.
aesthetic aspects, disease resistance, cold/heat tolerance,
salt tolerance, etc.). By doing so, the end consumer would
see the inherent ways in which plants improve the quality
of their lives and begin perceiving plants to be a necessity
in their lives rather than a mere luxury they could cast aside
during economic downturns, as they did during the ‘‘Great
Recession’’ of 2008-2009.
Since 2011, there has been a plethora of additional
research conducted regarding these functional plant
benefits and these voluminous studies provide compelling
evidence that warrants further attention. Thus, this new
series of forum articles attempts to update the findings
summarized in the original article by Hall and Dickson by
presenting a summary of the research on plant benefits that
has been conducted since 2011. By doing so, this new
information provides the basis for future innovative green
industry marketing efforts, which may, in turn, positively
influence the elasticity of demand for plants in general.
The first topic in the four-part series, Emotional and
Mental Health Benefits of Plants, is one that has been
shown to resonate with consumers of all demographic
segments (Hall and Dickson, 2011). These benefits are
segmented and discussed using the following categories:
anxiety and stress reduction, attention deficit recovery,
fractals and visual responses, decreased depression,
enhanced memory retention, greater happiness and life
satisfaction, mitigation of PTSD, increased creativity,
enhanced productivity and attention, reduced effects of
dementia, and improved self-esteem.
Reduced anxiety and stress
Significant correlations have been found between the use
of open spaces and reduced stress. Time spent in natural
settings can help reduce mental fatigue recovery time and
improve concentration levels (Entrix 2010, Keniger et al.
2013, Kjellgren and Buhrkall 2010, White et al. 2017, Wolf
and Housley 2014). Increased access to green spaces also
reduces psychological distress, depression symptoms,
clinical anxiety, and mood disorders in adults (Astell-Burt
et al. 2013, Beyer et al. 2014, Brown et al. 2013, de Vries
et al. 2013, Fan et al. 2011, Nutsford et al. 2013, Stigsdotter
2015, Triguero-Mas et al. 2015, White et al. 2013).
The term ‘‘stress recovery theory’’ was coined by van
den Berg and Custers (2011) and includes the benefits
derived when individuals immerse in nature, including
1
Received for publication January 17, 2019; in revised form April 8,
2019.
2
Professor and Graduate Student, respectively, Texas A&M University,
College Station, Texas 77843-2133. Corresponding author: Charles
Hall c-hall@tamu.edu.
30 Copyright 2019 Horticultural Research Institute J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

decreased anxiety, lower heart rates, skin conductance
recovery, lower concentrates of cortisol, and positive
changes in nerve activity (Alvarsson et al. 2010, Bowler
et al. 2010, Park et al. 2010, Park et al. 2017, Russell et al.
2013). Controlling for socio-economic and demographic
characteristics, positive relationships between green space
and overall health and stress reduction have been reported
(de Vries et al. 2003) and the effects are transcendent to
viewing images of nature (Ryan et al. 2014). For patients in
hospitals, exposure to real plants or even posters of plants,
resulted in lower levels of experienced stress (Beukeboom
et al. 2012). Exposure to natural scenes mediates the
negative effects of stress; one can recover faster from the
decrease of cognitive performance associated with stress,
especially reflected in attention tasks. (Berto 2014).
Stress reduction and mental restoration occur when
individuals live near green areas, have a view of
vegetation, or spend time in natural settings (Abraham et
al. 2010, Carrus et al. 2015, Watts 2017, Wolf and Housley
2014). The amount of green space in the neighborhood, and
in particular access to a garden or allotment, were
significant predictors of stress (Thompson et al. 2016). In
fact, the amount of green space in residential areas is
positively related to resident overall health (Groenewegen
et al. 2012). White et al. (2013) also found that individuals
have both lower mental distress and higher well-being
when living in urban areas with more green space.
Women also seem to experience more stress than men do
when away from nature. Roe et al. (2013b) found that there
was a significant inverse relationship between green spaces
and stress levels with higher levels of green space resulting
in lower stress levels. Women were found to display higher
stress levels than men when exposed to the same amount of
(or less) green space. Coincidently, the percentage of green
space effects showed a positive outcome on women by
decreasing the mean cortisol concentration. Women who
lived more than 1 km away from green spaces reported
higher stress levels and perceived poorer health and quality
of life than those who lived near of green spaces
(Stigsdotter et al. 2010). Beil and Hanes 2013 also found
there is greater benefit from exposure to natural settings as
measured by pre-and-post changes in salivary alpha-
amylase and self-reported stress with more of a significant
reduction in females than in males.
Thompson (2012) found that those who lived in green
spaces experienced less stress and participated in more
physical activity. Thompson also found self-reported
decreases in stress, diurnal patterns of cortisol secretion,
and quantity of relative green space in the living
environment to all be positively correlated.
Another study found that when comparing a group of
elderly women who spent 15 sessions outside participating
in gardening activities versus staying inside, those who had
gone outside had improved muscle mass and hand
dexterity, and decreased waist circumference, whereas the
women who spent the same time indoors had decreased
muscle mass and agility and increased symptoms of
depression (Park et al. 2016).
Stress reduction through green environments has been
achieved in office settings as well. When employees were
exposed to roses in the workplace, they had significantly
less heart rate variability than those who weren’t exposed
to roses (Callaghan and Mallory-Hill 2016, Ikei et al. 2014,
Ikei et al. 2013, Smith and Pitt 2011). Interior plants can
lead to healthy, productive workplaces through enhanced
attention capacity, lower stress levels, and higher job
satisfaction from viewing plants (Gilchrist et al. 2015,
Hartig et al. 2014, Raanaas et al. 2011). This concept also
carries over to break areas within the workplace (Berto
2014).
Biophilia is defined as humans’ innate tendency to seek
connections with nature and other forms of life. Biophilic
design is the incorporation of biophilia into the built
environment. There is a growing body of literature
documenting the benefits of implementing plants on a
large scale to capture the positive psychophysiological and
cognitive benefits afforded by biophilia in architecture
(Ryan et al. 2014). This type of architecture can reduce
stress, enhance creativity and clarity of thought, and
improve well-being in urbanized communities (Browning
et al. 2016). This theory is also backed by Pouya (2016),
who found that if these concepts were applied more widely,
we would see more of a positive impact. The perceptual
and physiological stress responses are correlated to the
complexity of fractals in nature, art and architecture, and
the predictability of the occurrence of design flows and
patterns in nature (Bejan and Zane 2012, Salingaros 2012).
When young people, particularly students, have a view
of green spaces during school, students exhibit significantly
better performance on attention tests and stress recovery
(Li and Sullivan 2016). Kelz et al. (2015) validated Li and
Sullivan’s findings by having children play on different
types of playgrounds with varied levels of green space. The
playground with high green space significantly reduced
students’ physiological stress levels and enhanced their
psychological well-being. They also perceived the envi-
ronment as being more restorative.
Lee et al. (2014) studied forest activities of Japanese
citizens and found significant differences between the
responses of the subjects in forest settings compared with
those in urban environments in salivary cortisol concen-
tration (an index of stress response), diastolic blood
pressure, and pulse rate. Further, subjects felt more
comfortable, soothed and refreshed when viewing a forest
landscape than an urban landscape.
Mennis (2018) found urban green spaces are associated
with lower stress when subjects are away from home,
which is speculated to be due to the properties of stress
reduction and attention restoration associated with expo-
sure to natural areas, and to the influence of other family
dynamics affecting stress levels within the home. Subjects
may also seek out urban greenspaces at times of lower
stress or explicitly for purposes of stress reduction.
Tree cover is also associated with stress reduction. Jiang
et al. (2016) found a positive correlation between urban
street tree density and self-reported stress recovery. Song
(2015) also found that physiological effects of a forest
environment can differ depending on a subject’s initial
levels of stress and that subjects with high initial blood
pressure and pulse rate showed a decrease in these values
J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019 31
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

after walking in a forested area, whereas those with low
initial values showed an increase. There was no physio-
logical adjustment effect observed in an urban area; thus,
these effects are specific to a forest environment.
Aspinall et al. (2015) also documents that forest-bathing
can cause stress reduction by using an EEG headset to
measure brain waves by amplitude and frequency.
Participants were asked to walk through an urban shopping
center to a 25-ha (62 acres) green space and a busy
commercial district with heavy traffic. The walk took
participants approximately 25 minutes each. When com-
paring the urban shopping center to the green space,
frustration, engagement, and arousal all decreased which is
consistent with restoration theory but meditation increased,
which was novel. When participants moved from the
greenspace to the busy commercial district, their arousal/
engagement increased, indicating that stress/fear also
increased.
Horiuchi et al. (2014) took another approach and used
real viewings of forests and non-forested areas and
compared near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) as well as
mood state scores, heart-rate, blood pressure, and sAMY
concentration (marker for stress). They found that the
NIRS signal, cerebral oxygenation levels, and mood state
levels were lower in forest settings than in non-forest
conditions, but blood pressure, heart rate variability, and
salivary amylase levels were similar. Interestedly, being in
the forest also caused a spike in cerebral activity.
This is reinforced by results of Im et al. (2016), who
looked at the effects of spending two hours in a forest in
Japan. To test neurological effects, they collected blood
and saliva samples and found that there was a significant
change in the level of cytokines that contributing to the
hyperactivity of the inflammatory response which is
physiological reaction of a stress response.
Joung et al. (2015) showed through NIRS that total Hb
(hemoglobin) concentration was significantly lower of
forest scenery over urban scenery. A lower concentration
of total Hb and oxy-Hb indicates that the quantity of
oxygen transmitted to the prefrontal cortex tissue is small.
In other words, the prefrontal cortex activity in a forest area
is more stabilized than in an urban area.
Vedder et al. (2015) took a different approach. They
used fMRI and asked individuals to imagine beautiful and
non-beautiful environments. Functional magnetic reso-
nance imaging (fMRI) showed significantly more cortical
activations when subjects imagined non-pleasant environ-
ments than when they imagined pleasant environments.
The results of this study show that a positive and a negative
frame of reference elicit distinct neural patterns of
environmental cognition. This means that non-beautiful
and non-pleasant environments demand more mental
processing than beautiful and pleasant environments. The
results correlate with previous propositions to explain the
experience of negative environments as characterized by
the demand on more mental resources than the experience
of positive environments. In other words, interacting with a
negative environment requires an additional investment in
emotion processing, cognitive control, and motor function.
These results support Aspinall et al. (2015), Horiuchi et al.
(2014), and Joung et al. (2015) with their claims of
reduction in delta waves (brainwaves for agitation and
excitement). Kim et al. (2010) found similar results when
looking at stress reactions using fMRI.
Students were recruited from Edinburgh University by
Roe et al. (2013a) to undergo an EEG study on natural
settings (fields, forests, and parks) versus urban sceneries
(buildings, roads, and walls). To control the effect of
people and animals, both were withheld from being
included in the pictures presented to the subjects. Subjects
were asked to rate each slide on four criteria based on how
attractive they found the scene, how likely are they to visit
the scene, how the scene made them feel from sad to happy
and also from calm to excited. The results for the ranking
questions showed that the landscape scenes were perceived
as more attractive, more inviting (willingness-to-visit), and
greater valence. Arousal was strongly correlated to the
urban scenes while interest was correlated to landscape
scenes. This confirms restorative theory, indicating a
positive psychological effect of natural scenes.
Rosenbaum used electroencephalogram (EEG) in a
replication-type study with eye-tracking. Given the lack
of neuroscience data in previous studies on consumer
responses and biophilic design in retail settings, they had
participants watch a video of a retail mall or lifestyle center
(e.g. an upscale shopping center or mixed-use commercial
development) with and without plants (biophilic and non-
biophilic). Those participants who viewed the biophilic
video were more enthused and interested and experienced a
higher state of mental relaxation than participants who
viewed the non-biophilic video. Participants who viewed
the biophilic video also reported lower levels of stress,
more attractiveness/focus, and were more emotionally
involved. This finding confirms previous results that
suggest that shoppers are becoming bored in their
excursions to enclosed malls while lifestyle centers
continue to proliferate.
Attention Deficit Recovery (Attention Restoration
Theory or ART)
Natural landscapes, such as beaches, waters, forests,
parks, and mountains, and availability of public open
spaces used for public entertainment and sports reduce
attention deficit disorders (ADD/ADHD) (Coutts and Hahn
2015, Frumkin 2013, Keniger et al. 2013). Green
restoration improved preschooler spatial working memory
(Schutte 2017) and cognitive functioning improved when
participants walked in nature (Berman et al. 2008).
Children with ADHD concentrated better after a walk in
a park than after a downtown neighborhood walk (Taylor
and Kuo 2009). Wilson (2015) showed that children who
play in greenspace for 30 minutes had increased sustained
mental ability and found greenspace to be restorative.
Taking micro-breaks to view nature can help with attention
restoration (Lee et al. 2015).
Fractals & Visual Response
We are so separated from nature that we make up for its
lack by imbuing our surroundings with those geometric
32 J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

qualities found in nature (Salingaros 2012). We try to shape
our immediate vicinity so that those qualities reproduce our
response to natural environments. From biophilia, natural
forms have inherent qualities, reducible to a mathematical
description, that induce a healing effect. Complex biophilic
environments dramatically increase brain size and perfor-
mance on intelligence tests (Salingaros 2012).
Decreased Depression
Being immersed in nature and vegetation were used as
active components in a therapeutic horticulture interven-
tion for clinical depression (Beute and de Kort 2018,
Gonzalez et al. 2010). Garden walking and reflective
journaling decreased depression scores in older adults
(McCaffrey et al. 2010). With patients who have major
depressive disorder (MDD), those who walked in nature
exhibited significant increases in memory span after the
nature walk relative to the urban walk. Green spaces also
reduced stress and pain, and increased attention perfor-
mance (McCaffrey et al. 2010). Participants also showed
increases in mood, but the mood effects did not correlate
with the memory effects, suggesting separable mechanisms
(Berman et al. 2012). Bezold (2018) put extensive numbers
to this idea, with a 6% lower incidence of high depressive
symptoms associated with greenness and found this
relationship to be stronger with highly populated areas.
Comparing household medical records and natural ameni-
ties, those residents with only 10% green space within
about half a mile had a 25% greater risk of depression and
a 30% greater risk of anxiety disorders versus those with
the highest degree of green space near the home (Wolf and
Housley 2014).
In a Korean study involving patients with moderate to
severe depression, participants were assigned to cognitive-
behavioral therapy in either a hospital setting or a forest
setting (arboretum), while a third group acted as a control
and were treated using standard outpatient care in the
community (Wolf and Housley 2014). Overall, depressive
symptoms were reduced most significantly in the forest
group, and the odds of complete remission were 20-30%
higher than typically observed from medication alone.
Moreover, the forest therapy group had more pronounced
reductions in physiological markers of stress, including
lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol and improve-
ments in heart rate variability, a marker of adequate
circulatory system response to stress. It appears that the
settings where psychotherapy is conducted can actually
become part of the therapy (Wolf and Housley 2014).
Enhanced Memory Retention
A 2012 experiment in Michigan found that people were
better able to perform a test of working memory (which
measures one’s ability to focus or concentrate) after
walking through a green arboretum, compared to those
who walked on traffic-heavy urban streets (Berman et al.
2012). Subjects who walked through the arboretum had a
20% improvement in working memory. Another study
determined that people who went for a 50-minute walk in
nature, compared to those who went for a similar length
walk in an urban environment, experienced less anxiety
and rumination, along with increased working memory
performance (Berman et al. 2012).
Being in nature and greenspace can also help improve
memory retention of patients suffering from strokes and
dementia (Detweiler and Warf 2005). In children, nature
exposure can influence cognitive development through
improved working memory and a reduction in inattentive-
ness (Dadvand et al. 2015).
Greater Happiness/Life Satisfaction
Interacting with nature, especially with the presence of
water, can increase self-esteem and mood, reduce anger,
and improve general psychological well-being with
positive effects on emotions or behavior (Barton and
Pretty 2010, Keniger et al. 2013, Mensah et al. 2016,
Windhager et al. 2011, Wolf and Housley 2014). In fact,
moving to homes with greener areas positively influences
mental health even after three years post-move (Alcock et
al. 2014). Moving to a less-green area significantly worsens
mental health within one year post-move, but returns to
pre-move mental health status thereafter (Alcock et al.
2014).This is true for public green spaces as well. City park
area quantity and accessibility is a strong predictor of
physical and community well-being (Larson et al. 2016).
Similarly, studies in Perth, Australia found that people in
neighborhoods with high-quality public open spaces had
better mental health than those with low-quality public
open space (Francis et al. 2012a). Features that made an
open space ‘‘high quality’’ included irrigated lawns,
walking paths, lighting, water features, playgrounds, and
birdlife. Mental health was assessed based on symptoms of
psychological distress such as nervousness and feelings of
hopelessness (Francis et al. 2012b). Findings were not
affected by the quantity of open space in the neighborhood,
nor by how frequently residents used the open space
(Francis et al. 2012a).
Pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being
are positively associated. Those who are more connected to
nature and exhibit environmentally-conscious behaviors
tend to experience more positive vitality and life
satisfaction compared to those less connected to nature
(Capaldi et al. 2014).
Van Dillen (2012) determined, through meta-analysis,
that quality and quantity of green space was correlated to
good health. Greater species diversity positively affects
personal well-being (Dallimer et al. 2012) and neighbor-
hood well-being (Luck et al., 2009). Visiting protected
natural sites (e.g. state parks) improves perceptions of
psychological, emotional, and social benefits (Lemieux et
al. 2012). Results from a meta-analysis in Toronto, Canada
suggest that people who live in neighborhoods with a
higher density of trees on their streets report significantly
less cardio-metabolic conditions. Having 10 or more trees
in a city block, on average, improves personal health
perceptions in ways comparable to a $10,000 increase in
annual personal income or being 7 years younger (Kardan
et al. 2015). The study also found that having 11 more trees
in a city block, on average, decreases cardio-metabolic
conditions in ways comparable to an increase in annual
J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019 33
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

personal income of $20,000 and moving to a neighborhood
with $20,000 higher median income or being 1.4 years
younger (Kardan et al. 2015).
Park et al. (2017) found that when subjects observed
plants, Oxy-Hb (oxyhemoglobin) concentrations in the
right prefrontal cortex were significantly lower, indicating
a physiological state of relaxation. Subjects also reported
more positive emotions (feeling more comfortable and
relaxed) when viewing foliage plants.
Mitigation of PTSD
Veterans with PTS (post-traumatic stress) treated with
Nature Adventure Rehabilitation (NAR) experienced an
improvement in emotional and social quality of life, post-
traumatic cognitive inventory, and hope and functioning
(Gelkopf et al. 2013). NAR seems to work through a
process of behavioral activation, desensitization, gradual
exposure to anxiety evoking situations, and gaining control
over symptomatology.
When victims of natural disasters, who are at a high risk
of PTSD, participated in horticulture therapy (HT)
programs, they showed an increase in regional gray matter
volume (rGMV) of the left subgenual anterior cingulate
cortex and left superior frontal gyrus compared with the
stress education (SE) group (Kotozaki et al. 2015,
Sekiguchi et al. 2015). They showed greater salivary
cortisol and alpha amylase levels, which are all signifi-
cantly reduced in individuals experiencing PTSD (Koto-
zaki 2014, Kotozaki et al. 2015, Sekiguchi et al. 2015). The
HT group also showed improvement on PTSD reactions,
post-traumatic growth, and positive states of mind
(Kotozaki et al. 2015). Post-traumatic growth refers to
the positive outcome of people who have experienced
traumatic events through recovering their quality of life.
People identified themselves with plant growth and gaining
a chance to be happy once more (Kotozaki et al. 2015).
Increased Creativity
Ling and Dale (2011) found a link between landscape
plants and creativity and considered how this may reflect
the potential for cultural diversity and thus sustainable
community development. Taking short walks in attractive
green environments can boost creativity and vitality
(Tyrvainen et al. 2014). These same areas can also be
used for ‘walking meetings’ which help boost creativity
(Oppezzo and Schwartz 2014).
Enhanced Productivity and Attention
Biophilic workplaces with views of nature and daylight
can lead to higher productivity and attention with
employees (Elzeyadi 2011, Windhager et al. 2011).
Workers in offices with poor light quality and views used
more sick leave hours and this effect contributes as much
as 6.5% to sick leave use. Moisture released into the air by
plants helps with a dry atmosphere, reducing headaches
and improving concentration. Visible greenery, both
indoors and out, reduces stress and increases the ability
to concentrate (Alker et al. 2014, van Duijin et al. 2011). In
one such concentration test, employees who had a view of
plants completed the test 19% faster than employees in a
room without a view of plants (Nieuwenhuis et al. 2014).
Offices in the Netherlands and Great Britain experienced a
15% increase in worker productivity when plants were
included in office space (Korpela et al. 2017, Nieuwenhuis
et al. 2014).
The Heschong-Mahone Group studied productivity at
the Sacramento Municipal Utility District Call Center
where employees were either seated with views of
vegetation through large windows or were excluded from
the vegetation view. Employees who had a vegetation view
made 6-7% more calls per hour than those with no view.
The initial investment of installing the windows was
recovered in 4 months by improved productivity (Alker et
al. 2014).
Jumeno and Matsumoto (2013), however, did not find
that plants in the workplace had a significant effect on
productivity or attention but found a significant difference
in the employee perceptions of friendliness, comfort,
freshness, and cleanliness of the workplace. Erzsebet et
al. (2014) suggests that improved employee productivity
and attention can be positively affected by the air-
purifying qualities of plants in the workplace by reducing
various allergies, irritations, hypersensitivity, asthma,
drowsiness, and eye problems, while also improving mood.
Jumeno and Matsumoto (2016) sought to quantify the
number of plants in a room that it would take to generate
positive results and found the more plants in a room, the
better the mood of the subjects. Their study also found that
the number and the size of plants affected the perceived air
quality and reaction times and as few as three small-to-
medium sized plants can make a positive difference. Even
a brief view of a green roof can have positive effects on
mood and productivity (Lee and Maheswaran 2011).
When asked about plants in the workplace, 97% of
employees would like to have more plants (Husti et al.
2015) because they perceive plants provide a sense of
relaxation, make the work environment more similar to
space at home, cheer up the image of the office, give a
sense of relief, and improve work motivations. Employees
without an outdoor view from their desk are five times
more likely to put a plant in their office than those with an
outdoor view (Bringslimark et al. 2011). Office employees
with an outdoor green view were happier and had
positively associated higher productivity and job satisfac-
tion levels (Lottrup et al. 2015).
In elementary-level classrooms, green walls (described
as a wall with green plants) can provide restorative impacts
to school children. Results show that children in class-
rooms where a green wall was placed scored better on tests
for selective attention (van den Berg et al. 2017). The green
wall also positively influenced children’s classroom
evaluations. When integrating a school garden into the
curriculum, children’s physical activity was increased and
sedentary behavior decreased (van den Berg et al. 2017).
Children who received breaks and time outside exhibited
improved concentration (Duvall and Sullivan 2016). Just
placing plants in the classroom improved performance,
with children progressing through school curriculum 20-
26% faster (van Duijin et al. 2011).
34 J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

Reduced effects of dementia
Participants in outside horticultural therapy activities
such as gardening or landscaping are more actively
engaged, have reduced incidents of aggressive behavior,
and improved cognitive capacity (Gigliotti and Jarrott
2005).
Improved Self-Esteem
Natural green space has long been used in the promotion
of human well-being through green exercise (exercise in a
greenspace or outdoors) for improvements on mental
health and self-esteem (Townsend and Weerasuriya
2010). A multi-study analysis assessed the best regime of
green exercise that is needed to improve self-esteem and
mood (Barton and Pretty 2010). Dose responses for both
intensity and duration showed large benefits from short
engagements in green exercise, and then diminishing but
still positive returns (Barton and Pretty 2010). Every green
environment improved both self-esteem and mood and the
presence of water generated greater effects. Both men and
women exhibited similar improvements in self-esteem after
green exercise, though men showed a more positive
difference in mood.
Summary
Consumers have historically shown an inclination to
purchase products that enhance their quality of life (Hall
and Dickson 2011), meaning they will purchase items that
positively influence their social, physical, psychological,
cognitive, environmental, and spiritual well-being. Plants
in native and improved landscapes (and interiorscapes)
have been documented to influence each of six quality of
life constructs. This paper focused on providing evidence
from the literature regarding the emotional and mental
health benefits associated with plants, thereby influencing
the psychological and cognitive well-being constructs of
quality of life. This research should be strategically
incorporated into both industry-wide and firm-specific
marketing messages that highlight the quality of life value
proposition in order to maintain the industry’s sense of
value and relevance to consumers of the future.
Literature Cited
Abraham, A., K. Sommerhalder, and T. Abel. 2010. Landscape and
well-being: a scoping study on the health-promoting impact of outdoor
environments. Intl. J. Public Health 55 (1): 59–69.
Alcock, I., M.P. White, B.W. Wheeler, L.E. Fleming, and M.H.
Depledge. 2014. Longitudinal effects on mental health of moving to
greener and less green urban areas. Environ. Sci. Tech. 48 (2): 1247–
1255.
Alker, J., M. Malanca, C. Pottage, and R. O’Brien. 2014. Health,
wellbeing & productivity in offices. The next chapter for green building.
Rep. World Green Building Council. 87 p.
Alvarsson, J.J., S. Wiens, and M.E. Nilsson. 2010. Stress recovery
during exposure to nature sound and environmental noise. Intl. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 7 (3): 1036–1046.
Aspinall, P., P. Mavros, R. Coyne, and J. Roe. 2015. The urban brain:
analysing outdoor physical activity with mobile EEG. Br. J. Sports Med.
49 (4): 272–276.
Astell-Burt, T., X. Feng, and G.S. Kolt. 2013. Does access to
neighborhood green space promote a healthy duration of sleep? Novel
findings from 259, 319 Australians. BMJ Open 3 (8): e003094.
Barton, J. and J. Pretty. 2010. What is the best dose of nature and
green exercise for improving mental health? A multi-study analysis.
Environ. Sci. Tech. 44 (10): 3947–3955.
Beil, K. and D. Hanes. 2013. The influence of urban natural and built
environments on physiological and psychological measures of stress - a
pilot study. Intl. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10 (4): 1250–1267.
Bejan, A. and J.P. Zane. 2012. Design in nature. Mechanical
Engineering Mag. Select Articles 134 (06): 42–47.
Berman, M.G., J. Jonides, and S. Kaplan. 2008. The cognitive benefits
of interacting with nature. Psych. Sci. 19 (12): 1207–1212.
Berman, M.G., E. Kross, K.M. Krpan, M.K. Askren, A. Burson, P.J.
Deldin, S. Kaplan, L. Sherdell, I.H. Gotlib, and J. Jonides. 2012.
Interacting with nature improves cognition and affect for individuals with
depression. J. Affective Disorders 140 (3): 300–305.
Berto, R. 2014. The role of nature in coping with psycho-
physiological stress: A literature review on restorativeness. Behav. Sci.
4 (4): 394.
Beukeboom, C.J., D. Langeveld, and K. Tanja-Dijkstra. 2012. Stress-
reducing effects of real and artificial nature in a hospital waiting room. J.
Alt. Compl. Med. 18 (4): 329–333.
Beute, F. and Y.A.W. de Kort. 2018. The natural context of wellbeing:
Ecological momentary assessment of the influence of nature and daylight
on affect and stress for individuals with depression levels varying from
none to clinical. Health Place 49: 7-18.
Beyer, K., A. Kaltenbach, A. Szabo, S. Bogar, F. Nieto, and K.
Malecki. 2014. Exposure to neighborhood green space and mental health:
evidence from the survey of the health of Wisconsin. Intl. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 11 (3): 3453–3472.
Bezold, C.P., R.F. Banay, B.A. Coull, J.E. Hart, P. James, L.D.
Kubzansky, S.A. Missmer, and F. Laden. 2018. The association between
natural environments and depressive symptoms in adolescents living in
the United States. J. Adolescent Health 62 (4): 488–495.
Bowler, D.E., L.M. Buyung-Ali, T.M. Knight, and A.S. Pullin. 2010.
A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of
exposure to natural environments. BioMed Center Public Health 10 (1):
456.
Bringslimark, T., T. Hartig, and Grindal PatilG. . 2011. Adaptation to
windowlessness: Do office workers compensate for a lack of visual
access to the outdoors? Environ. Behavior 43 (4): 469–487.
Brown, D.K., J.L. Barton, and V.F. Gladwell. 2013. Viewing nature
scenes positively affects recovery of autonomic function following acute-
mental stress. Environ. Sci. Tech. 47 (11): 5562–5569.
Browning, W., C. Ryan, and J. Clancy. 2016. Patterns of biophilic
design. New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC. 64 p.
Callaghan, A. and S. Mallory-Hill. 2016. Biophilia and nature-based
features to support stress reduction in knowledge workers. 12 p.
Capaldi, C.A., R.L. Dopko, and J.M. Zelenski. 2014. The relationship
between nature connectedness and happiness: a meta-analysis. Frontiers
Psych. 5: 976.
Carrus, G., M. Scopelliti, R. Lafortezza, G. Colangelo, F. Ferrini, F.
Salbitano, M. Agrimi, L. Portoghesi, P. Semenzato, and G. Sanesi. 2015.
Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-
being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas. Land.
Urban Plan. 134 (0): 221–228.
Coutts, C. and M. Hahn. 2015. Green infrastructure, ecosystem
services, and human health. Intl. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 12 (8):
9768.
Dadvand, P., M.J. Nieuwenhuijsen, M. Esnaola, J. Forns, X.
Basaga˜
na, M. Alvarez-Pedrerol, I. Rivas, M. L´
opez-Vicente, M.D.C.
Pascual, and J. Su. 2015. Green spaces and cognitive development in
primary schoolchildren. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 112 (26): 7937–7942.
Dallimer, M., K.N. Irvine, A.M. Skinner, Z.G. Davies, J.R. Rouquette,
L.L. Maltby, P.H. Warren, P.R. Armsworth, and K.J. Gaston. 2012.
J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019 35
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations
between self-reported human well-being and species richness. BioSci.
62 (1): 47–55.
de Vries, S., S. van Dillen, P. Groenewegen, and P. Spreeuwenberg.
2013. Streetscape greenery and health: Stress, social cohesion and
physical activity as mediators. Social Sci. Med. 94: 26-33.
de Vries, S., R.A. Verheij, P.P. Groenewegen, and P. Spreeuwenberg.
2003. Natural environments—healthy environments? An exploratory
analysis of the relationship between greenspace and health. Environ.
Plan. 35 (10): 1717–1731.
Detweiler, M.B. and C. Warf. 2005. Dementia wander garden aids
post cerebrovascular stroke restorative therapy: a case study. Alternative
Therapies in Health & Medicine 11 (4): 54–58.
Duvall, J. and Sullivan, W.C. 2016. How to get more out of the green
exercise experience: Insights from Attention Restoration Theory. P 53–61
In J. Barton, R. Bragg, C. Wood, and J. Pretty (Eds.) Green Exercise:
Linking nature, health, and well-being. Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
Elzeyadi, I.M. 2011. Daylighting bias and biophilia: Quantifying the
impact of daylighting on occupants’ health. US GBC, Eugene, OR. 9 p.
Entrix, I. 2010. Portland’s green infrastructure: Quantifying the health,
energy, and community livability benefits. City of Portland, Portland,
OR. 101 p.
Erzsebet, B., M. Cantor, V. Singureanu, A. Husti, H. Denisa, and B.
Mihai. 2014. Ornamental plants used for improvement of living, working
and studying spaces microclimate. ProEnviron./ProMed. 6 (16): 562–565.
Fan, Y., K.V. Das, and Q. Chen. 2011. Neighborhood green, social
support, physical activity, and stress: Assessing the cumulative impact.
Health place 17 (6): 1202–1211.
Francis, J., B. Giles-Corti, L. Wood, and M. Knuiman. 2012a.
Creating sense of community: The role of public space. J. Environ.
Psych. 32 401-409.
Francis, J., L.J. Wood, M. Knuiman, and B. Giles-Corti. 2012b.
Quality or quantity? Exploring the relationship between public open
space attributes and mental health in Perth, Western Australia. Soc. Sci.
Med. 74 (10): 1570–1577.
Frumkin, H. 2013. The evidence of nature and the nature of evidence.
American J. Prev. Med. 44 (2): 196–197.
Gelkopf, M., I. Hasson-Ohayon, M. Bikman, and S. Kravetz. 2013.
Nature adventure rehabilitation for combat-related posttraumatic chronic
stress disorder: A randomized control trial. Psychiatry Res. 209 (3): 485–
493.
Gigliotti, C.M. and S.E. Jarrott. 2005. Effects of horticulture therapy
on engagement and affect. Canadian J Aging/La Revue canadienne du
vieillissement 24 (4): 367–377.
Gilchrist, K., C. Brown, and A. Montarzino. 2015. Workplace settings
and wellbeing: Greenspace use and views contribute to employee
wellbeing at peri-urban business sites. Land. Urban Plan. 138: 32-40.
Gonzalez, M.T., T. Hartig, G.G. Patil, E.W. Martinsen, and M.
Kirkevold. 2010. Therapeutic horticulture in clinical depression: a
prospective study of active components. J. Adv. Nursing 66 (9): 2002–
2013.
Groenewegen, P.P., A.E. van den Berg, J. Maas, R.A. Verheij, and S.
de Vries. 2012. Is a green residential environment better for health? If so,
why? Annals Assoc. American Geographers 102 (5): 996–1003.
Hall, C. and M. Dickson. 2011. Economic, environmental, and health/
well-being benefits associated with green industry products and services:
A review. J. Environ. Hort. 29 (June): 96–103.
Hartig, T., R. Mitchell, S. De Vries, and H. Frumkin. 2014. Nature and
health. Annual Review of Public Health 35 207-228.
Horiuchi, M., J. Endo, N. Takayama, K. Murase, N. Nishiyama, H.
Saito, and A. Fujiwara. 2014. Impact of viewing vs. not viewing a real
forest on physiological and psychological responses in the same setting.
Intl. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 11 (10): 10883–10901.
Husti, A.M., I. Ciobanu, R. Cicevan, I. Neacsu, and M. Cantor. 2015.
Image of ornamental plants in work enviroments and their effect on
employees. Agricultura 95 (3-4): 3–4.
Ikei, H., M. Komatsu, C. Song, E. Himoro, and Y. Miyazaki. 2014.
The physiological and psychological relaxing effects of viewing rose
flowers in office workers. J. Physiol. Anthro. 33 (1): 6.
Ikei, H., J. Lee, C. Song, M. Komatsu, E. Himoro, and Y. Miyazaki.
2013. Physiological relaxation of viewing rose flowers in high school
students [Article in Japanese, English abstract]. Jpn. J. Physiol. Anthro.
18:97–103.
Im, S.G., H. Choi, Y.H. Jeon, M.K. Song, W. Kim, and J.M. Woo.
2016. Comparison of effect of two-hour exposure to forest and urban
environments on cytokine, anti-oxidant, and stress levels in young adults.
Intl. J. Environ. Res public health 13 (7): 625.
Jiang, B., D. Li, L. Larsen, and W. Sullivan. 2016. A dose-response
curve describing the relationship between urban tree cover density and
self-reported stress recovery. Environ. Behav. 48(4): 607–629.
Joung, D., G. Kim, Y. Choi, H. Lim, S. Park, J.M. Woo, and B.J. Park.
2015. The prefrontal cortex activity and psychological effects of viewing
forest landscapes in autumn season. Intl. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
12 (7): 7235–7243.
Jumeno, D. and H. Matsumoto. 2016. The effects of indoor foliage
plants on perceived air quality, mood, attention, and productivity. J. Civil
Eng. Arch. Res. 3 (4): 1359–1370.
Jumeno, D. and H. Matsumoto. 2013. The effects of the number of
indoor foliage plants on productivity, stress and attention, Proceedings of
CLIMA. Prague, Czech Republic June 16-19, 2013. 8:1–9.
Kardan, O., P. Gozdyra, B. Misic, F. Moola, L.J. Palmer, T. Paus, and
M.G. Berman. 2015. Neighborhood greenspace and health in a large
urban center. Scientific Reports 5: 11610.
Kelz, C., G.W. Evans, and K. R¨
oderer. 2015. The restorative effects of
redesigning the schoolyard: A multi-methodological, quasi-experimental
study in rural Austrian middle schools. Environment and Behavior 47 (2):
119–139.
Keniger, L., K. Gaston, K. Irvine, and R. Fuller. 2013. What are the
benefits of interacting with nature? Intl. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10
(3): 913–935.
Kim, T.H., G.W. Jeong, H.S. Baek, G.W. Kim, T. Sundaram, H.K.
Kang, and J.K. Song. 2010. Human brain activation in response to visual
stimulation with rural and urban scenery pictures: A functional magnetic
resonance imaging study. Sci. Total Environ. 408 (12): 2600–2607.
Kjellgren, A. and H. Buhrkall. 2010. A comparison of the restorative
effect of a natural environment with that of a simulated natural
environment. J. Environ. Psych. 30 (4): 464–472.
Korpela, K., J. De Bloom, M. Sianoja, T. Pasanen, and U. Kinnunen.
2017. Nature at home and at work: Naturally good? Links between
window views, indoor plants, outdoor activities and employee well-being
over one year. Land. Urban Plan. 160: 38-47.
Kotozaki, Y. 2014. Medium- to long-term psychological support for
women living in areas affected by the great East Japan Earthquake
empirical studies on the impact of horticultural therapy. J Trauma
Treatment 3 187-189.
Kotozaki, Y., H. Takeuchi, A. Sekiguchi, T. Araki, K. Takahashi, Y.
Yamamoto, T. Nozawa, Y. Taki, and R. Kawashima. 2015. Positive
effects of the victim by the growing of plants after great East Japan
earthquake. Intl. J. Recent Sci. Res. 6 (2): 2850–2858.
Larson, L.R., V. Jennings, and S.A. Cloutier. 2016. Public parks and
wellbeing in urban areas of the United States. PLoS ONE 11 (4):
e0153211.
Lee, A.C. and R. Maheswaran. 2011. The health benefits of urban
green spaces: a review of the evidence. J. Public Health 33 (2): 212–222.
Lee, J., Y. Tsunetsugu, N. Takayama, B.-J. Park, Q. Li, C. Song, M.
Komatsu, H. Ikei, L. Tyrv¨
ainen, and T. Kagawa. 2014. Influence of forest
therapy on cardiovascular relaxation in young adults. Evidence-Based
Compl. Alt. Med. 1-7 doi: 10.1155/2014/834360.
Lee, K.E., K.J.H. Williams, L.D. Sargent, N.S.G. Williams, and K.A.
Johnson. 2015. 40-second green roof views sustain attention: The role of
micro-breaks in attention restoration. J. Environmental Psychology 42:
182-189.
36 J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

Lemieux, C.J., P.F. Eagles, D.S. Slocombe, S.T. Doherty, S.J. Elliott,
and S.E. Mock. 2012. Human health and well-being motivations and
benefits associated with protected area experiences: An opportunity for
transforming policy and management in Canada. Parks 18 (1): 71–85.
Li, D. and W.C. Sullivan. 2016. Impact of views to school landscapes
on recovery from stress and mental fatigue. Land. Urban Plan. 148: 149-
158.
Ling, C. and A. Dale. 2011. Nature, place and the creative class: Three
Canadian case studies. Land. Urban Plan. 99 (3-4): 239–247.
Lottrup, L., U.K. Stigsdotter, H. Meilby, and A.G. Claudi. 2015. The
workplace window view: a determinant of office workers’ work ability
and job satisfaction. Land. Res. 40 (1): 57–75.
Luck, G.W., L.T. Smallbone, and R. O’Brien. 2009. Socio-economics
and vegetation change in urban ecosystems: patterns in space and time.
Ecosystems 12 (4): 604–620.
McCaffrey, R., C. Hanson, and W. McCaffrey. 2010. Garden walking
for depression: a research report. Holistic Nursing Practice 24 (5): 252–
259.
Mennis, J., M. Mason, and A. Ambrus. 2018. Urban greenspace is
associated with reduced psychological stress among adolescents: A
Geographic Ecological Momentary Assessment (GEMA) analysis of
activity space. Landscape and Urban Planning 174:1–9.
Mensah, C.A., L. Andres, U. Perera, and A. Roji. 2016. Enhancing
quality of life through the lens of green spaces: A systematic review
approach. International Journal of Wellbeing 6 (1):142–163.
Nieuwenhuis, M., C. Knight, T. Postmes, and S.A. Haslam. 2014. The
relative benefits of green versus lean office space: three field experiments.
J. Experi. Psych. - Applied 20 (3): 199–214.
Nutsford, D., A. Pearson, and S. Kingham. 2013. An ecological study
investigating the association between access to urban green space and
mental health. Public Health 127 (11): 1005–1011.
Oppezzo, M. and D.L. Schwartz. 2014. Give your ideas some legs:
The positive effect of walking on creative thinking. J. Experi. Psych:
Learning, Memory, Cog. 40 (4): 1142.
Park, B.J., Y. Tsunetsugu, T. Kasetani, T. Kagawa, and Y. Miyazaki.
2010. The physiological effects of Shinrin-yoku (taking in the forest
atmosphere or forest bathing): evidence from field experiments in 24
forests across Japan. Environmental health and preventive medicine 15
(1): 18.
Park, S., A. Lee, K. Son, W. Lee, and D. Kim. 2016. Gardening
intervention for physical and psychological health benefits in elderly
women at community centers. HortTech 26 (4): 474–483.
Park, S., Song, C., Oh, Y., Miyazaki, Y. and K. Son. 2017.
Comparison of physiological and psychological relaxation using
measurements of heart rate variability, prefrontal cortex activity, and
subjective indexes after completing tasks with and without foliage lnt. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 14:1087 doi:10.3390/ijerph14091087.
Pouya, S., E. Bayramo˘
glu, and ¨
O. Demirel. 2016. Restorative garden
as an useful way to relieve stress in megacities, a case study in Istanbul.
˙
Inonu Universitesi Sanat ve Tasarim Dergisi 6 (13): 355–369.
Raanaas, R.K., K.H. Evensen, D. Rich, G. Sjøstrøm, and G. Patil.
2011. Benefits of indoor plants on attention capacity in an office setting.
Journal of Environmental Psychology 31 (1): 99–105.
Roe, J.J., P.A. Aspinall, P. Mavros, and R. Coyne. 2013a. Engaging
the brain: the impact of natural versus urban scenes using novel EEG
methods in an experimental setting. Environ. Sci. 1 (2): 93–104.
Roe, J.J., C.W. Thompson, P.A. Aspinall, M.J. Brewer, E.I. Duff, D.
Miller, R. Mitchell, and A. Clow. 2013b. Green space and stress:
Evidence from cortisol measures in deprived urban communities. Intl. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 10 (9): 4086–4103.
Russell, R., A.D. Guerry, P. Balvanera, R.K. Gould, X. Basurto, K.M.
Chan, S. Klain, J. Levine, and J. Tam. 2013. Humans and nature: how
knowing and experiencing nature affect well-being. Annual Rev.
Environ. Res. 38 473-502.
Ryan, C.O., W.D. Browning, J.O. Clancy, S.L. Andrews, and N.B.
Kallianpurkar. 2014. Biophilic design patterns: emerging nature-based
parameters for health and well-being in the built environment.
International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR 8 (2):
62–76.
Salingaros, N.A. 2012. Beauty, life, and the geometry of the
environment. Chapter 2 63-103.
Schutte, A. 2017. Impact of urban nature on executive functioning in
early and middle childhood. Env. and Behavior 49(1):3–30. doi.org/10.
1177/0013916515603095.
Sekiguchi, A., Y. Kotozaki, M. Sugiura, R. Nouchi, H. Takeuchi, S.
Hanawa, S. Nakagawa, C.M. Miyauchi, T. Araki, A. Sakuma, Y. Taki,
and R. Kawashima. 2015. Resilience after 3/11: structural brain changes
1 year after the Japanese earthquake. Molecular Psych. 20 (5): 552–554.
Smith, A. and M. Pitt. 2011. Healthy workplaces: plantscaping for
indoor environmental quality. Facilities 29 (3/4): 169–187.
Song, C.R., H. Ikei, M. Kobayashi, T. Miura, M. Taue, T. Kagawa, Q.
Li, S. Kumeda, M. Imai, and Y. Miyazaki. 2015. Effect of Forest
Walking on Autonomic Nervous System Activity in Middle-Aged
Hypertensive Individuals: A Pilot Study. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health 12 (3): 2687–2699.
Stigsdotter, U.K. 2015. Nature, health and design. Alam Cipta 8: 89–
96.
Stigsdotter, U.K., O. Ekholm, J. Schipperijn, M. Toftager, F. Kamper-
Jørgensen, and T.B. Randrup. 2010. Health promoting outdoor
environments-Associations between green space, and health, health-
related quality of life and stress based on a Danish national representative
survey. Scandinavian J. Soc. Med. 38 (4): 411–417.
Taylor, A.F. and F.E. Kuo. 2009. Children with attention deficits
concentrate better after walk in the park. J. Attention Disorders 12 (5):
402–409.
Thompson, C.W., P. Aspinall, J. Roe, L. Robertson, and D. Miller.
2016. Mitigating stress and supporting health in deprived urban
communities: the importance of green space and the social environment.
Intl. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 13 (4): 440.
Thompson, C.W., J. Roe, P. Aspinall, R. Mitchell, A. Clow, and D.
Miller. 2012. More green space is linked to less stress in deprived
communities: Evidence from salivary cortisol patterns. Land. Urban Plan.
105 (3): 221–229.
Townsend, M. and R. Weerasuriya. 2010. Beyond blue to green: The
benefits of contact with nature for mental health and well-being.
University Australia Deakin, Melbourne, Australia. 152 p.
Triguero-Mas, M., P. Dadvand, M. Cirach, D. Mart´
ınez, A. Medina,
A. Mompart, X. Basaga˜
na, R. Graˇ
zuleviˇ
ciene
˙, and M.J. Nieuwenhuijsen.
2015. Natural outdoor environments and mental and physical health:
relationships and mechanisms. Environ. Intl. 77: 35-41.
Tyrvainen, L., A. Ojala, K. Korpela, T. Lanki, Y. Tsunetsugu, and T.
Kagawa. 2014. The influence of urban green environments on stress relief
measures: A field experiment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 38:
1–9.
van den Berg, A. and M. Custers. 2011. Gardening promotes
neuroendocrine and affective restoration from stress. J. Health Psych.
16 (1): 3–11.
van den Berg, A.E., J.E. Wesselius, J. Maas, and K. Tanja-Dijkstra.
2017. Green walls for a restorative classroom environment: a controlled
evaluation study. Environ. Behav. 49 (7): 791–813.
van Dillen, S.M., S. de Vries, P.P. Groenewegen, and P. Spreeuwen-
berg. 2012. Greenspace in urban neighbourhoods and residents’ health:
adding quality to quantity. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 66 (6): e8.
doi: 10.1136/jech.2009.104695.
van Duijin, B., J. Klein Hesselink, M. Kester, and Jansen en Hilde
SpittersJ. 2011. ‘Planten in de klas’ [plants in the classroom].
Productschap Tuinbouw (Product Board for Horticulture), Rapport
Project.
Vedder, A., L. Smigielski, E. Gutyrchik, Y. Bao, J. Blautzik, E.
P¨
oppel, and E. Russell. 2015. Neurofunctional correlates of environmen-
tal cognition: an fMRI study with images from episodic memory. Plos
One 10 (4): e0122470.
J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019 37
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020

Watts, G. 2017. The effects of ‘‘greening’’ urban areas on the
perceptions of tranquillity. Urban Forestry Urban Greening 26: 11-17.
White, M.P., S. Pahl, K. Ashbullby, S. Herbert, and M.H. Depledge.
2013. Feelings of restoration from recent nature visits. J. Environ. Psych.
35: 40-51.
White, M.P., S. Pahl, B.W. Wheeler, M.H. Depledge, and L.E.
Fleming. 2017. Natural environments and subjective wellbeing: Different
types of exposure are associated with different aspects of wellbeing.
Health place 45: 77-84.
Wilson, M.R. 2015. Green play: Restorative neurobehavioral effects
on ADHD children. Montreat College, ProQuest, Master of Science in
Environmental Education. 65 p.
Windhager, S., K. Atzwanger, F.L. Bookstein, and K. Schaefer. 2011.
Fish in a mall aquarium—An ethological investigation of biophilia. Land.
Urban Plan. 99 (1): 23–30.
Wolf, K. and E. Housley. 2014. Reflect & restore: urban green space
for mental wellness. The TKF Foundation, Annapolis, MD. 14 p.
38 J. Environ. Hort. 37(1):30–38. March 2019
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jeh/article-pdf/37/1/30/2442381/0738-2898-37_1_30.pdf by guest on 08 July 2020