Accumulation of self-reported restorative effects of natural sounds: A seven-day intervention indoors

IF 6.1 1区 心理学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Journal of Environmental Psychology Pub Date : 2024-08-05 DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102388
Yasushi Suko, Kalevi M. Korpela
{"title":"Accumulation of self-reported restorative effects of natural sounds: A seven-day intervention indoors","authors":"Yasushi Suko,&nbsp;Kalevi M. Korpela","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigated the restorative effects of repeated listening to natural sounds indoors in real-life settings. Previous studies have mainly been cross-sectional and laboratory studies. We designed an online field experiment lasting seven days, in which we assigned 166 university students to one of four intervention groups: (1) listening to natural sounds, (2) sitting in silence (i.e., another means of restoration), (3) reading news online (i.e., a prevalent but not necessarily restorative activity), or (4) no intervention (i.e., the control). Self-reported restorative experience was measured both before and after the daily intervention (but once a day in the no-intervention group), and the weekly-measured perceived stress and state mindfulness were assessed at the beginning and end of the intervention week. Linear hypothesis tests based on a linear mixed-effects model (LMM) showed that, at the day level, natural sounds were the most restorative, followed by silence, while reading news proved not to be restorative. In addition, the daily restorative effect of natural sounds was carried over to later days and its seven-day accumulation was half as great as the general daily restorative effect, although the within-day pre-post change ostensibly diminished over time. An ANCOVA and paired t-tests revealed that a reduction in the weekly-measured perceived stress and an increase in the weekly-measured mindfulness took place after listening to natural sounds or sitting in silence, with the former intervention type having stronger effects, aligning with the results for the restorative experience. Our findings suggest that the carryover effect of repeated listening to natural sounds for psychological restoration may more than compensate for the diminishing returns in within-day pre-post changes over the course of a week.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48439,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","volume":"98 ","pages":"Article 102388"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494424001610/pdfft?md5=59cdedd941d975ad06923b825e72d5a9&pid=1-s2.0-S0272494424001610-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494424001610","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigated the restorative effects of repeated listening to natural sounds indoors in real-life settings. Previous studies have mainly been cross-sectional and laboratory studies. We designed an online field experiment lasting seven days, in which we assigned 166 university students to one of four intervention groups: (1) listening to natural sounds, (2) sitting in silence (i.e., another means of restoration), (3) reading news online (i.e., a prevalent but not necessarily restorative activity), or (4) no intervention (i.e., the control). Self-reported restorative experience was measured both before and after the daily intervention (but once a day in the no-intervention group), and the weekly-measured perceived stress and state mindfulness were assessed at the beginning and end of the intervention week. Linear hypothesis tests based on a linear mixed-effects model (LMM) showed that, at the day level, natural sounds were the most restorative, followed by silence, while reading news proved not to be restorative. In addition, the daily restorative effect of natural sounds was carried over to later days and its seven-day accumulation was half as great as the general daily restorative effect, although the within-day pre-post change ostensibly diminished over time. An ANCOVA and paired t-tests revealed that a reduction in the weekly-measured perceived stress and an increase in the weekly-measured mindfulness took place after listening to natural sounds or sitting in silence, with the former intervention type having stronger effects, aligning with the results for the restorative experience. Our findings suggest that the carryover effect of repeated listening to natural sounds for psychological restoration may more than compensate for the diminishing returns in within-day pre-post changes over the course of a week.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
积累自我报告的自然声音的恢复效果:为期七天的室内干预
本研究调查了在真实环境中反复聆听室内自然声音的恢复效果。以往的研究主要是横断面研究和实验室研究。我们设计了一个为期七天的在线现场实验,将 166 名大学生分配到四个干预组中的一个:(1) 聆听自然声音,(2) 静坐(即另一种恢复方式),(3) 在线阅读新闻(即一种普遍但不一定具有恢复效果的活动),或 (4) 无干预(即对照组)。在每天进行干预之前和之后,都会对自我报告的恢复体验进行测量(但不干预组每天测量一次),在干预周开始和结束时,会对每周测量的感知压力和正念状态进行评估。基于线性混合效应模型(LMM)的线性假设检验表明,在一天中,自然声音最能使人恢复精神,其次是安静,而阅读新闻则不能使人恢复精神。此外,自然声音的每日恢复效果会延续到以后几天,其七天的累积效果是一般每日恢复效果的一半,尽管随着时间的推移,日内的前后变化明显减小。方差分析和配对 t 检验表明,在聆听自然声音或静坐后,每周测量的感知压力减少了,每周测量的正念增加了,前一种干预类型的效果更强,这与恢复性体验的结果一致。我们的研究结果表明,反复聆听自然声音以恢复心理状态所产生的延续效应可能足以弥补一周内日间前后变化的收益递减。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
8.70%
发文量
140
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Environmental Psychology is the premier journal in the field, serving individuals in a wide range of disciplines who have an interest in the scientific study of the transactions and interrelationships between people and their surroundings (including built, social, natural and virtual environments, the use and abuse of nature and natural resources, and sustainability-related behavior). The journal publishes internationally contributed empirical studies and reviews of research on these topics that advance new insights. As an important forum for the field, the journal publishes some of the most influential papers in the discipline that reflect the scientific development of environmental psychology. Contributions on theoretical, methodological, and practical aspects of all human-environment interactions are welcome, along with innovative or interdisciplinary approaches that have a psychological emphasis. Research areas include: •Psychological and behavioral aspects of people and nature •Cognitive mapping, spatial cognition and wayfinding •Ecological consequences of human actions •Theories of place, place attachment, and place identity •Environmental risks and hazards: perception, behavior, and management •Perception and evaluation of buildings and natural landscapes •Effects of physical and natural settings on human cognition and health •Theories of proenvironmental behavior, norms, attitudes, and personality •Psychology of sustainability and climate change •Psychological aspects of resource management and crises •Social use of space: crowding, privacy, territoriality, personal space •Design of, and experiences related to, the physical aspects of workplaces, schools, residences, public buildings and public space
期刊最新文献
Why humans form place attachment: A terror management perspective Perceived support for climate policy in Australia: The asymmetrical influence of voting behaviour Regret about environmental destruction: Examining the relative strengths of affective regret and cognitive regret in promoting pro-environmental behaviors Testing the effects of health-benefit, environmental-benefit and co-benefit priming for promoting sustainable food choice and their psychological mechanisms: A randomized controlled trial combined with eye tracking Communicating consensus among climate scientists increases estimates of consensus and belief in human-caused climate change across the globe
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1