Visualizing safe and restorative ecologies: a mini review on eye-tracking studies of female spatial cognition in campus environments
The intersection of environmental psychology, landscape ecology, and visual cognition has increasingly utilized eye-tracking technology to understand how humans perceive outdoor spaces. However, the specific visual behaviors and cognitive preferences of female college students in campus micro-ecologies remain underexplored. This mini review synthesizes current eye-tracking literature on gendered spatial perception, focusing on how female students navigate the dual needs of ecological restoration and personal safety. We synthesize empirical benchmarks regarding female students’visual attention allocations toward vegetation structures, pathway configurations, lighting conditions, and secluded enclaves. We examine how evolutionary frameworks (e.g., Prospect-Refuge theory) and feminist geography converge rather than conflict when accounting for physical spatial configurations, lived gendered experiences, familiarity, and anticipated harassment. Furthermore, we critically evaluate the trade-offs among static-image trials, mobile eye-tracking, and immersive virtual reality (VR) in terms of ecological validity, experimental control, and laboratory-to-field translation. Finally, we address visual metrics ambiguities—specifically biophilic preference versus threat vigilance—and outline future directions involving multimodal biometric integration to design safer, inclusive campus ecologies.
Authors
- Huan Wang (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3878-2760)
- Xiaoman Liu (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6659-1427)
- Xue Feng (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5759-1265)
- Jingyi Deng
- Dong Wang
- Xiaonong Yan
Institutions
- Dongying Vocational Institute (CN)
- Guangdong Innovative Technical College (CN)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Published
- 2026-11-10
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.2011436
- Primary Topic
- Urban Green Space and Health
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00