environmental psychology Flashcards
define environmental psychology
the discipline that studies the interplay between individuals and the built and natural environment
environmental behaviour in context
behaviour doesn’t occur in a vacuum
environmental context imposes constraints on range of behaviours permissible
determine particular aspects or patterns of an individuals behaviour
how built environment shapes behaviour - office space communication study
Boutellier et al (2008)
studied the effect of office layout on communication in Novartis Campus in Switzerland
- Cell offices vs. Multi-space layout (x2)
- measured frequency of face-to-face communication
- measured average duration of each event
(all assessed via observation)
results:
- more communication events in multi-space than cell (around 5 per hour vs 2 per hour)
- duration of communication events was longer in cell offices than multi-space (9 mins in cell, 3 mins in multi)
- time without communication per hour was much higher in multi-space (17 min multi vs 3 min cell)
conclusions:
- open-plan has lots of quick chats/check ins whilst cell spaces have longer meetings
- key info may have already been obtained but may stay longer anyway in cell office
- multi space have more time to do their work - but this is very interrupted so is it actually better?
what changes the effect of the environment on behaviour/outcomes in office setting (2)
the nature of the task
- e.g. some questions can be asked super quick with a quick answer - suits multi-space BUT some needs longer meetings
and the nature of the person
- individual differences
Seddigh et al (2014) - office type and task type
office types
- Cell or individual offices
- Shared-room offices
- S/M/L open-plan offices
- Flex offices
measures:
- type of task = do you have many individual tasks that require concentration?
- distraction = how often are you disturbed so are not fully immersed in the task?
- cognitive stress = how much of the time during the past 4 weeks have you found it difficult to think clearly?
also measured:
Maslach Burnout Inventory:
- Emotional exhaustion (5 items - I feel burned out from my work)
- depersonalization (5 items - e.g. I have become less enthusiastic about my work)
- personal efficacy (6 items - I feel confident that I am effective at getting things done)
+ general health
results:
- easy task = less concentration = less distraction
- hard task = more concentration = more distractable
- being distracted and needing concentration causes cognitive stress
field theory (Lewin, 1940)
behaviour is determined by the interaction between a person and their environment
Lewin’s Equation: 𝐵 = 𝑓(𝑃, 𝐸)
- 𝐵 is behaviour
- 𝑃 is person
- 𝐸 is the environment
f(P,E) = the life space
used topology to map the “life-space” - 3 components
- individual person
- the current situation
- goal they wish to achieve
use these to map the course from where the person is towards their goal through the life space
topology used as a visual representation of forces on an individual - restraining and driving forces on a person towards their goal
environmental response inventory
McKechnie (1974)
measures peoples responses to different environments
includes the need for privacy (e.g. some people need more time alone or in silence, more distracted by others)
Gifford (1980)
found negative correlations between need for privacy and evaluations of a café (r = -0.22) and City Hall (r = -0.17)
–> high need for privacy = dislike public spaces more
idea of individual differences ( Gifford only looks at this)
Roskams et al (2019) - interaction between people and environment study - noise levels
level of acoustic comfort - volume levels and how much noise in spaces is distracting for different people
Characteristics of the task:
- Task complexity
- Interactivity
Characteristics of the person
- Big Five Mini-Markers Extraversion sub-scale Weinstein’s (1978) Noise Sensitivity Scale
Outcomes:
- Acoustic comfort
- Disturbance by speech
- Difficulties in concentration
- Perceived stress
- Work engagement
- Office productivity
results:
- higher sensitivity = more negative rating of office noise, more disturbed by speech, difficulty concentration, less productive
he only studied open plan - need to research with cell offices too to see which layout is ideal
restorative environments
“happy places”
idea of in nature
personal places, quiet, calm, at ease, freedom, recharge
fascinating, novel, provide escape, support desired activity
what makes environments restorative - scale (4 components)
perceived restorativeness scale (Hartig et al 1996)
measures extent to which an environment is restorative
- fascination - my attention is drawn to many interesting things
- being away - spending time here gives me a good break from my day-to-day routine
- coherence (extent) - there is too much going on - logical environment
- compatibility - I can do things I like here
zoos as restorative environments study
Pals et al (2009)
butterfly garden vs baboon enclosure
visitors rated the enclosures on the perceived restorativeness scale components:
- fascination = predicted both preference and pleasure for butterfly but only preference for baboons
- novelty = predicted preference for butterflies and baboons but pleasure for neither
- escape = predicted preference and pelasure for baboons but neither for butterflies
- coherence = insignificant on both
- compatibility = insig on both
different features predict different outcomes for different environments
Jiang et al (2021) - effect of restorative environment (simulated)
simulated environment - watch a video of a scenario:
- urban park
- office plaza
- urban street
overlayed sound onto the video
- no sound
- nature sounds
- mechanical sounds
- traffic sounds
therefore sound only matches visual in some environments - causing low coherence in some conditions
did a multi-dimensional mood questionnaire before and after watching video
results:
- no sound = stay same with park and office, feel worse after urban street scene
- nature sound = feel better watching park, no big change on other contexts (urban street only slightly worse so makes it better
- mechanical = park and street make you feel worse, no effect on office plaza (e.g. hearing a digger in a park ruins the environment)
- traffic noise = decreased mood in all video conditions
conclusion:
even simulated environments impacts mood
Jiang et al (2021) - effect of restorative environment (simulated) - evaluations (3)
- doesn’t include factor with no visual
- low ecological validity - simulated environment
- doesn’t clarify why they are doing the study - may predict it’s about mood - demand effects
Mayer et al (2009) - bus study
- take a group of people
- randomly allocated to 2 buses
- one bus takes them to a park, another to the city centre
- on the drive (20 min) all participants asked to think about a loose end in their life that needs solving (not an impossible solve though) - no talking
- let them walk around the environment for 10 mins and sit for 5
- measured positive and negative affect (positive and negative affect schedule - PANAS) and whether they feel more prepared to tie up their loose end (strongly agree to strongly disagree)
Mayer et al (2009) - bus study - results
nature = more positive affect than urban
urban didn’t make them feel bad, just not as good as in nature
feel more able to tackle problem when spending more time in the natural environment than in urban
3 theories of mechanisms of restorative environments
stress recovery theory
attention restoration theory
perceptual fluency account
mechanism of restorative environment - stress recovery theory (Ulrich, 1983)
features in natural environments (immediately) evoke positive affect, without conscious recognition
serves to lower arousal and reduce stress
many day-to-day environments are overstimulating, arousing, and stressful - therefore seek these restorative environments
Kang and Shin (2020) - forest therapy study
links to stress recovery theory
forest therapy program over 8 sessions from september to november doing different tasks in nature
random allocation of students to it
measured stress levels before and after program ( compared to control )
results:
stress levels reduced - argued this as evidence for stress recovery theory
mechanism of restorative environment - attention restoration theory
Kaplan and Kaplan (1989)
most environments ‘fight’ for our attention and so are depleting = ‘directed attentional fatigue’
natural environments:
- provide fascination
- a sense of connectedness
- a sense of being away from daily hassles
- are compatible with inclinations
as a result, natural environments restore attention
attention restoration theory - tested (Mayer et al., 2009)
bus study - to nature or urban setting
had to do an attention task, measured number of errors
natural = less errors than urban setting
however, changes in how connected participants felt to nature (not attentional capacity) mediated the effect of exposure to natural vs. urban environments on outcomes
contact with nature to help regulate emotions - study - method
Bratman et al (2024)
survey of 600 adults in the US
measured 5 components:
- frequency of contact with nature
–> about how often do you usually visit or pass through outdoor natural areas for any reason? - use of distraction
–> to feel less upset during upsetting situations, I divert my attention away from what is happening - rumination
–> “I think ‘Why do I have problems other people don’t have?’” - use of reappraisal
–> “When something upsetting happens, to feel less upset, I think about the possible benefits of the situation” - emotional ill-being and well-being
–> measures of positive and negative affect, life satisfaction, purpose in life, and perceived stress
distraction, rumination, and reappraisal as methods of emotional regulation
contact with nature to help regulate emotions - study - results
correlational study - don’t assume direction
frequency of nature contact –> distraction, rumination, and reappraisal –> wellbeing + illbeing –> positive affect, purpose in life, life satisfaction, negative affect, perceived stress
distraction, rumination, and reappraisal as mediators
frequency of nature contact = positive association with reappraisal (use reappraisal for emotion regulation more), negative with using distraction and rumination (use these less)
rumination + distraction = worse wellbeing
reappraisal = better wellbeing
wellbeing => positive association with positive affect, satisfaction, and purpose
illbeing => positive association with negative affect and perceived stress
mechanism of restorative environment - perceptual fluency account
Joye et al (2016)
natural environments are processed more fluently than urban settings - due to their fractal patterns
they contain more redundant information than urban scenes
environment is coherent and a lot is redundant
Hagerhall et al (2015) - study of fractals in nature
fractals on a scale of randomness and dimensions
dimensions = level of complexity of the fractal
natural environment = more random fractals
urban = less random fractals
used alpha responses on EEG as a marker of wakefully relaxed state
more alpha = more restorative environment
results:
- dimension has no impact on alpha response
- randomness has a large effect on alpha response
–> random = larger response
–> regular = smaller response
therefore random fractals = high alpha measurements = wakeful relaxed state
