Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preliminary data on effects of different street vegetation on stress recovery

  • Research Article
  • Architecture and Human Behavior
  • Published:
Building Simulation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Streets are important public spaces in daily life, and their stress-relieving abilities help to improve people’s physical and mental health. To investigate the effects of different types of street vegetation on people’s stress recovery, this study used virtual reality technology to establish five street scenes with different vegetation types, including a non-vegetated street, a street with trees, a street with trees and grass, a street with trees and hedges, and a street with trees, grass, and flowers. Twenty-four participants completed the Trier Social Stress Test and then watched the five street scenes for stress recovery. Participants rated the vegetated streets as significantly better at reducing stress than the non-vegetated street. Compared with the non-vegetated street, the participants’ POMS scores decreased by 2.59–12.09 and ROS scores increased by 0.83–3.67 after watching the vegetated streets, indicating significant improvement in mood (P < 0.001). HRV data showed that the combination of trees, grass, and flowers was the most effective for stress recovery (LF/HF = 0.67 ± 0.42; pNN50 = 27.41% ± 16.32%). EEG data showed that participants’ alpha power was 0.05–0.66 µV2 higher and mental stress scores based on brainwave power were 0.23–0.37 points lower in the vegetated streets than in the non-vegetated street. The occipital and frontal regions showed the most positive responses to changes in vegetation elements, and alpha brainwaves in the O2 channel were the most active. Therefore, the streets with vegetation were more conducive to stress recovery than the non-vegetated street. It is thus suggested to integrate trees, grass, flowers, and other vegetation types along streets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd-Alhamid F, Kent M, Bennett C, et al. (2019). Developing an innovative method for visual perception evaluation in a physical-based virtual environment. Building and Environment, 162: 106278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abe D, Masuda N, Shimomura Y (1990). Study on the landscape planting models of the street using the photomontage method. Journal of the Japanese Institute of Landscape Architects, 53: 245–250. (in Japanese)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen AP, Kennedy PJ, Cryan JF, et al. (2014). Biological and psychological markers of stress in humans: Focus on the Trier Social Stress Test. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 38: 94–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benetos A, Thomas F, Bean KE, et al. (2005). Role of modifiable risk factors in life expectancy in the elderly. Journal of Hypertension, 23: 1803–1808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown RD, Corry RC (2011). Evidence-based landscape architecture: The maturing of a profession. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100: 327–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caneva G, Bartoli F, Zappitelli I, et al. (2020). Street trees in Italian cities: story, biodiversity and integration within the urban environment. Rendiconti Lincei Scienze Fisiche e Naturali, 31: 411–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capotorti G, Bonacquisti S, Abis L, et al. (2020). More nature in the city. Plant Biosystems - An International Journal Dealing With All Aspects of Plant Biology, 154: 1003–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang CY, Hammitt WE, Chen P, et al. (2008). Psychophysiological responses and restorative values of natural environments in Taiwan. Landscape and Urban Planning, 85: 79–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaumon M, Bishop DVM, Busch NA (2015). A practical guide to the selection of independent components of the electroencephalogram for artifact correction. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 250: 47–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiang YC, Li D, Jane HA (2017). Wild or tended nature? The effects of landscape location and vegetation density on physiological and psychological responses. Landscape and Urban Planning, 167: 72–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Brito JN, Pope ZC, Mitchell NR, et al. (2020). The effect of green walking on heart rate variability: A pilot crossover study. Environmental Research, 185: 109408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Kort YAW, Meijnders AL, Sponselee AAG, et al. (2006). What’s wrong with virtual trees? Restoring from stress in a mediated environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26: 309–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries S, Verheij RA, Groenewegen PP, et al. (2003). Natural environments—Healthy environments? An exploratory analysis of the relationship between greenspace and health. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 35: 1717–1731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsadek M, Liu B, Lian Z (2019). Green façades: Their contribution to stress recovery and well-being in high-density cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 46: 126446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster JJ, Sutterer DW, Serences JT, et al. (2017). Alpha-band oscillations enable spatially and temporally resolved tracking of covert spatial attention. Psychological Science, 28: 929–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao Y, He F, Meng X, et al. (2020). Thermal behavior analysis of hollow bricks filled with phase-change material (PCM). Journal of Building Engineering, 31: 101447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatersleben B, Andrews M (2013). When walking in nature is not restorative—The role of prospect and refuge. Health & Place, 20: 91–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gidlow CJ, Jones MV, Hurst G, et al. (2016). Where to put your best foot forward: Psycho-physiological responses to walking in natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45: 22–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG (2010). Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 25: 90–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartig T, Korpela K, Evans GW, et al. (1997). A measure of restorative quality in environments. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 14: 175–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann M, Westermann JR, Kowarik I, et al. (2012). Perceptions of parks and urban derelict land by landscape planners and residents. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11: 303–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hou W, Li M, Huang J (2019). Performance study of light assembly operations considering time pressure and task complexity. In: Proceedings of 2019 International Conference on Computer Science, Communications and Multimedia Engineering.

  • Huang Q, Yang M, Jane HA, et al. (2020). Trees, grass, or concrete? The effects of different types of environments on stress reduction. Landscape and Urban Planning, 193: 103654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia C, Zhang Z, Li S, et al. (2023). Study on the effects of personal heated table mats on the comfort level of large office space heated by air-conditioner. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 42: 102731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabisch N, Püffel C, Masztalerz O, et al. (2021). Physiological and psychological effects of visits to different urban green and street environments in older people: A field experiment in a dense inner-city area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 207: 103998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang H (2021). Sample size determination and power analysis using the G*Power software. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 18: 17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenwick RA, Shammin MR, Sullivan WC (2009). Preferences for riparian buffers. Landscape and Urban Planning, 91: 88–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laumann K, Gärling T, Stormark KM (2001). Rating scale measures of restorative components of environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21: 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin W, Chen Q, Jiang M, et al. (2019). The effect of green space behaviour and per capita area in small urban green spaces on psychophysiological responses. Landscape and Urban Planning, 192: 103637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindal PJ, Hartig T (2013). Architectural variation, building height, and the restorative quality of urban residential streetscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33: 26–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindal PJ, Hartig T (2015). Effects of urban street vegetation on judgments of restoration likelihood. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 14: 200–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu F, Yan L, Meng X, et al. (2022). A review on indoor green plants employed to improve indoor environment. Journal of Building Engineering, 53: 104542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohr VI, Pearson-Mims CH, Tarnai J, et al. (2004). How urban residents rate and rank the benefits and problems associated with trees in cities. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, 30: 28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maas J, Verheij RA, Groenewegen PP, et al. (2006). Green space, urbanity, and health: How strong is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60: 587–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maffei L, Masullo M, Pascale A, et al. (2016). Immersive virtual reality in community planning: Acoustic and visual congruence of simulated vs real world. Sustainable Cities and Society, 27: 338–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martens D, Gutscher H, Bauer N (2011). Walking in “wild” and “tended” urban forests: The impact on psychological well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31: 36–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer M, Zaval L, Orlove B, et al. (2021). More than nature: Linkages between well-being and greenspace influenced by a combination of elements of nature and non-nature in a New York City urban park. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 61: 127081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng X, Meng L, Gao Y, et al. (2022a). A comprehensive review on the spray cooling system employed to improve the summer thermal environment: application efficiency, impact factors, and performance improvement. Building and Environment, 217: 109065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng X, Yan L, Liu F (2022b). A new method to improve indoor environment: Combining the living wall with air-conditioning. Building and Environment, 216: 108981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordh H, Østby K (2013). Pocket parks for people—A study of park design and use. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 12: 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberndorfer E, Lundholm J, Bass B, et al. (2007). Green roofs as urban ecosystems: ecological structures, functions, and services. BioScience, 57: 823–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papousek I, Nauschnegg K, Paechter M, et al. (2010). Trait and state positive affect and cardiovascular recovery from experimental academic stress. Biological Psychology, 83: 108–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park BJ, Tsunetsugu Y, Ishii H, et al. (2008). Physiological effects of Shinrin-yoku (taking in the atmosphere of the forest) in a mixed forest in Shinano Town, Japan. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 23: 278–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoffelen JM, Poort J, Oostenveld R, et al. (2011). Selective movement preparation is subserved by selective increases in corticomuscular gamma-band coherence. Journal of Neuroscience, 31: 6750–6758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder H, Flannigan J, Coles R (2006). Residents’ attitudes toward street trees in the UK and U.S. communities. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, 32: 236–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer F, Ginsberg JP (2017). An overview of heart rate variability metrics and norms. Frontiers in Public Health, 5: 258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sommer R (1997). Further cross-national studies of tree form preference. Ecological Psychology, 9: 153–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song C, Ikei H, Miyazaki Y (2021). Effects of forest-derived visual, auditory, and combined stimuli. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 64: 127253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taelman J, Vandeput S, Vlemincx E, et al. (2011). Instantaneous changes in heart rate regulation due to mental load in simulated office work. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 111: 1497–1505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todorova A, Asakawa S, Aikoh T (2004). Preferences for and attitudes towards street flowers and trees in Sapporo, Japan. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69: 403–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomitaka M, Uchihara S, Goto A, et al. (2021). Species richness and flower color diversity determine aesthetic preferences of natural-park and urban-park visitors for plant communities. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 11: 100130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triguero-Mas M, Gidlow CJ, Martínez D, et al. (2017). The effect of randomised exposure to different types of natural outdoor environments compared to exposure to an urban environment on people with indications of psychological distress in Catalonia. PLoS One, 12: e0172200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich RS, Simons RF, Losito BD, et al. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11: 201–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valtchanov D (2010). Physiological and affective responses to immersion in virtual reality: Effects of nature and urban settings. Master Thesis, University of Waterloo, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Berg AE, Jorgensen A, Wilson ER (2014). Evaluating restoration in urban green spaces: Does setting type make a difference? Landscape and Urban Planning, 127: 173–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dongen RP, Timmermans HJP (2019). Preference for different urban greenscape designs: A choice experiment using virtual environments. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 44: 126435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verheij RA, Maas J, Groenewegen PP (2008). Urban–rural health differences and the availability of green space. European Urban and Regional Studies, 15: 307–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang X, Rodiek S, Wu C, et al. (2016). Stress recovery and restorative effects of viewing different urban park scenes in Shanghai, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 15: 112–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang J, Liu S, Meng X, et al. (2021). Application of retro-reflective materials in urban buildings: A comprehensive review. Energy and Buildings, 247: 111137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Y, Swain RE, Jiang N, et al. (2020). Design with nature and eco-city design. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 6: 1781549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeom S, Kim H, Hong T (2021). Psychological and physiological effects of a green wall on occupants: A cross-over study in virtual reality. Building and Environment, 204: 108134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Thwaites K, Simpson J (2022). Exploring the use of restorative component scale to measure street restorative expectations. URBAN DESIGN International, 27: 145–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu CP, Lee HY, Luo X (2018). The effect of virtual reality forest and urban environments on physiological and psychological responses. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 35: 106–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuen B, Nyuk Hien W (2005). Resident perceptions and expectations of rooftop gardens in Singapore. Landscape and Urban Planning, 73: 263–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all participants for their time.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Innovation Institute for Sustainable Maritime Architecture Research and Technology, Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao, 266033, China

    Chao Liu, Jing Shi & Weijun Gao

  2. College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao, 266033, China

    Nan Zhang, Jiaxin Li & Yanan Yu

Authors
  1. Chao Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiaxin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jing Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Weijun Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yanan Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Chao Liu, Nan Zhang, Jiaxin Li, Jing Shi and Yanan Yu. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Chao Liu, Nan Zhang and Weijun Gao. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jing Shi.

Ethics declarations

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, C., Zhang, N., Li, J. et al. Preliminary data on effects of different street vegetation on stress recovery. Build. Simul. 16, 2109–2121 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-023-1018-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-023-1018-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation