The blind spot in research on nature's benefits: Restorative versus instorative effects and potential biases
Open Access
- 12 June 2026
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Environmental Psychology
- Vol. 113
Abstract
No abstract availableAll Related Versions
Funding Information
- European Research Council (ERC-2022-CoG-BrainScape-101086188)
- European Commission
- Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung
- Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
This publication has 93 references indexed in Scilit:
- The effects of walking in nature on negative and positive affect in adult psychiatric outpatients with major depressive disorder: A randomized-controlled studyJournal of Affective Disorders, 2022
- A simple tree planting framework to improve climate, air pollution, health, and urban heat in vulnerable locations using non‐traditional partnersPlants, People, Planet, 2021
- Interacting with nature improves cognition and affect for individuals with depressionJournal of Affective Disorders, 2012
- Development of the PRCQ: A measure of perceived restorative characteristics of zoo attractionsJournal of Environmental Psychology, 2009
- Determinants of restorative experiences in everyday favorite placesHealth & Place, 2008
- The need for psychological restoration as a determinant of environmental preferencesJournal of Environmental Psychology, 2006
- Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacityJournal of Environmental Psychology, 2005
- Alone or with a friend: A social context for psychological restoration and environmental preferencesJournal of Environmental Psychology, 2004
- RATING SCALE MEASURES OF RESTORATIVE COMPONENTS OF ENVIRONMENTSJournal of Environmental Psychology, 2001
- REFLECTION AND ATTENTIONAL RECOVERY AS DISTINCTIVE BENEFITS OF RESTORATIVE ENVIRONMENTSJournal of Environmental Psychology, 1997