Impacts of nature imagery on people in severely nature‐deprived environments

Abstract

An estimated 5.3 million Americans live or work in nature‐deprived venues such as prisons, homeless shelters, and mental hospitals. Such removal from nature can result in an “extinction of experience” that can further lead to disinterest or disaffection toward natural settings, or even biophobia (fear of the natural environment). People who infrequently – or never – spend time in nature will be deprived of the numerous physical and emotional benefits that contact with nature affords. We report on the effects of vicarious nature experiences (nature videos) provided to maximum‐security prison inmates for one year, and compared their emotions and behaviors to inmates who were not offered such videos. Inmates who watched nature videos reported feeling significantly calmer, less irritable, and more empathetic, and committed 26% fewer violent infractions as compared to those who did not watch the videos. Prison staff corroborated these findings. This research reinforces the value of nature exposure as a powerful tool not only for corrections administrators, but also for urban planners and policy makers, to promote socially desirable behaviors.

Back to nature? Attention restoration theory and the restorative effects of nature contact in prison

“…The present study corroborates previous findings (Nadkarni et al 2017 andTurner, 2018), that nature contact engenders feelings of calm and wellbeing. The additional insights offered by ART demonstrate that two different kinds of nature contact -via green spaces, and via nature images -both enabled being away, extent and fascination, albeit in different ways.…”

“…Despite the apposite nature of ART (noted by Söderlund and Newman 2017), this analytical framing has not been widely deployed in prisons, and relevant published studies of the potentially therapeutic effects of nature contact are scarce. Moore's 1981 paper reported fewer sickness calls made by prisoners with a view of nature from their cell, but since then knowledge about the impact of nature contact in prison had advanced relatively little until two recent and significant contributions by Nadkarni et al (2017) and Moran and Turner (2018). In framing their experimental study of the impact of viewing nature videos on solitary-confined prisoners in a US facility, Nadkarni et al (2017) differentiate between direct, indirect, and vicarious nature contact.…”

“…Moore's 1981 paper reported fewer sickness calls made by prisoners with a view of nature from their cell, but since then knowledge about the impact of nature contact in prison had advanced relatively little until two recent and significant contributions by Nadkarni et al (2017) and Moran and Turner (2018). In framing their experimental study of the impact of viewing nature videos on solitary-confined prisoners in a US facility, Nadkarni et al (2017) differentiate between direct, indirect, and vicarious nature contact. For them, direct contact was contact with natural settings independent of human intervention (so-called 'wilderness'); indirect contact occurred in a more controlled environment (a park/garden), and vicarious contact was mediated (e.g.…”

The ecology of human–nature interactions

“…Of course, for some groups of people, such 'virtual' or 'vicarious' interactions are important and can have positive impacts (e.g. [21,22]).…”

Focusing Attention on Reciprocity Between Nature and Humans Can Be the Key to Reinvigorating Planetary Health

“…One noteworthy study found that prisoners in solitary confinement exhibited a 26% reduction in aggression when exposed to nature videos during a daily, 1-hour exercise period as compared to the control group (Nadkarni, Hasbach, Thys, Crockett, & Schnacker, 2017). An earlier study (Weinstein et al, 2015) found that increased exposure to nature resulted in more community cohesion and substantially lower crime rates.…”