Are Some Natural Environments More Psychologically Beneficial Than Others? The Importance of Type and Quality on Connectedness to Nature and Psychological Restoration

By K. Wyles, M. White, C. Hattam, Sabine Pahl, Haney King, M. Austen. 2019

255 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f9f4129e5db1f16650ada935807ba7ac40c5070b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

1. A. Hunt
2. Miles Richardson
3. Anne Cleary
4. M. White
5. Sabine Pahl
6. Kelly S. Fielding
7. A. Roiko
8. Zoȅ Murray

In Social Psychology

1. A. Hunt
2. Miles Richardson
3. Anne Cleary
4. M. White
5. Sabine Pahl
6. Kelly S. Fielding
7. A. Roiko
8. Zoȅ Murray

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Miles Richardson
2. Anne Cleary
3. Jim Burt
4. A. Hunt
5. M. White
6. Sabine Pahl
7. Kelly S. Fielding
8. A. Roiko

Citations in the corpus

• Predictors of Nature Connection Among Urban Residents: Assessing the Role of Childhood and Adult Nature Experiences (2018, background): “%) showed that visits to coastal and rural environments were associated with greater recalled nature connection as compared with visits to urban green space (Wyles et al., 2017).”
• Nature contact, nature connectedness and associations with health, wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours (2020, background): “Firstly, recent research suggests higher subjective wellbeing is associated with visits to higher quality nature settings (Wyles et al., 2019).”