How do nature type and expertise impact restorative perceptions and eye movements? A between‐subjects eye‐tracking study

Abstract Previous research has shown that natural environments and landscape‐related expertise affect psychological restoration and visual behaviour. However, little is known about how subtle differences in naturalness across similar settings, and the role of expertise, influence restorative benefits and eye movements. This study addresses these gaps by investigating how different nature settings—wild nature, tended nature (includes plaza, lawn, path, pool and waterfall settings), and urban environments—influence human preferences, restorative perceptions and eye movements. A between‐subjects experimental design was used, with 280 participants randomly assigned to one of seven landscape settings (40 participants per setting). Eye movements were tracked during the experiment to assess visual engagement. The study found that the type of setting significantly influenced preferences, restorative potential and outcomes. Wild nature, along with two tended nature settings (pool and waterfall), was rated higher in restorative potential compared with urban and plaza settings by both expert and non‐expert groups. No significant differences were observed between pool, waterfall and wild nature settings in these ratings. While expertise influenced preferences in lawn, path and waterfall settings, it did not significantly impact perceptions of restorative potential or outcomes in most settings. Furthermore, settings had a stronger effect on eye movements in non‐experts, with notable differences in eye movement behaviour between the two groups. This study emphasizes the importance of designing landscapes that cater to the diverse needs and preferences of different user groups. The findings contribute to the interdisciplinary field of people–nature relationships, providing insights for landscape architecture, urban planning and public health. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
People and Nature
Published
2025-03-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.70020
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Urban Green Space and Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.60

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How do nature type and expertise impact restorative perceptions and eye movements? A between‐subjects eye‐tracking study

Xiong Yao, Yuxiang Lan, Yuanping Shen, Qunyue Liu et al.
3 citations
People and Nature
Urban Green Space and Health
3.60
article

How do nature type and expertise impact restorative perceptions and eye movements? A between‐subjects eye‐tracking study

Xiong Yao, Yuxiang Lan, Yuanping Shen, Qunyue Liu, Meng Huang, Hong‐Xin Wang, Wang Qin, Xiuping Lin, Zhipeng Zhu, Yaling Gao
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Previous research has shown that natural environments and landscape‐related expertise affect psychological restoration and visual behaviour. However, little is known about how subtle differences in naturalness across similar settings, and the role of expertise, influence restorative benefits and eye movements. This study addresses these gaps by investigating how different nature settings—wild nature, tended nature (includes plaza, lawn, path, pool and waterfall settings), and urban environments—influence human preferences, restorative perceptions and eye movements. A between‐subjects experimental design was used, with 280 participants randomly assigned to one of seven landscape settings (40 participants per setting). Eye movements were tracked during the experiment to assess visual engagement. The study found that the type of setting significantly influenced preferences, restorative potential and outcomes. Wild nature, along with two tended nature settings (pool and waterfall), was rated higher in restorative potential compared with urban and plaza settings by both expert and non‐expert groups. No significant differences were observed between pool, waterfall and wild nature settings in these ratings. While expertise influenced preferences in lawn, path and waterfall settings, it did not significantly impact perceptions of restorative potential or outcomes in most settings. Furthermore, settings had a stronger effect on eye movements in non‐experts, with notable differences in eye movement behaviour between the two groups. This study emphasizes the importance of designing landscapes that cater to the diverse needs and preferences of different user groups. The findings contribute to the interdisciplinary field of people–nature relationships, providing insights for landscape architecture, urban planning and public health. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

People and NatureVol. 7(5)
Huaqiao University (CN), Guangdong Urban & Rural Planning and Design Institute (CN), Sanya University (CN), Fujian University of Technology (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, China Scholarship Council, Fujian Provincial Department of Science and Technology
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Urban Green Space and Health
3.60
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.