Future research should investigate the association between the quality of natural environments and children’s long-term psychological well-being Engagement with nature is known to be essential for children’s cognitive, social-emotional, and physical development. Research has also investigated the psychological benefits of children’s exposure to nature. This literature review aimed to provide an overview of the current understanding of the role of nature in supporting children’s psychological well-being, while also assessing the methodologies of existing research and identifying future research priorities.
A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify research that investigated the association between children’s (age 6–12 years) exposure to nature and psychological wellbeing. Search criteria focused on studies written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals between January 2000 and July 2021. Studies involving children with mood and anxiety problems were included in the review, however, studies of children with psychological disorders were excluded. Additionally, only studies that used quantitative assessments of psychological outcomes were included. The search yielded 40 studies, which were conducted in 14 countries—mainly in Europe (19 studies) and North America (15 studies). Researchers categorized the studies as either “experimental” or “observational” research designs. Studies were further classified by type of intervention and the methodologies used to assess children’s psychological response and interactions with nature.
Out of the 40 reviewed studies, 19 were classified as observational, in that the researchers “did not directly interfere with the study population or manipulate the study environments.” Observational studies mainly took a cross-sectional approach. The majority of observational studies focused on residential environmental settings (15 studies), and, to a lesser degree, considered school and public settings. Blue spaces (water environments) were investigated the least. The effect of accessibility/quantity of the natural environment on children’s psychological well-being was the focus of nearly all of the observational studies; the quality of natural environments and children’s engagement with nature was explored less frequently. Measurements of children’s exposure to nature were mainly captured through satellite or GIS data, with some studies relying on self- or parent-reports of exposure to nature ratings. Children’s psychological well-being was for the most part assessed with verified standardized tests and scales. Three studies incorporated bio-monitoring methods (blood pressure and hair cortisol levels). As for the results of these studies, 12 found statistically significant although weak associations and five found moderate associations between nature exposure and children’s psychological well-being. One study found no association, and one study linked nature exposure with decreased psychological well-being. Strong associations were not detected in any of the studies.
Experimental studies, conducted with experimental or quasi-experimental methods, accounted for 21 studies in the review. These types of studies utilized cross-sectional designs slightly more frequently than longitudinal designs. The most commonly investigated environmental settings included schools and public open spaces. The majority (14 studies) considered the effect of active and direct interactions with natural environments in regard to children’s psychological well-being, while fewer (7 studies) explored the effect of children’s passive viewing of nature. As with observational studies, most experimental studies employed standardized tests to assess children’s psychological well-being outcomes. Bio-monitoring methods were used in five studies, which included measures such as heart rate variability and salivary cortisol levels. Overall, the strength of the effect of nature exposure on children’s psychological well-being was higher in experimental than in observational studies. Among experimental studies, nine documented weak associations and ten indicated moderate associations or effects. Again, no studies revealed strong associations. Longitudinal studies found stronger effects than cross-sectional studies.
The review provides an overview of the research designs and outcomes identified regarding the effect of nature exposure on children’s psychological well-being. Importantly, the review also identified several gaps in recent literature. Future research should prioritize “examining the quality (subtle characteristics and attributes) of natural environments and explore the longitudinal effects of nature exposure.” Studies that investigate a range of settings, including blue space, and use methods that precisely measure psychological responses will also contribute to a more comprehensive understanding.
The Bottom Line