Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Urban Forestry & Urban Greening

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ufug

The effect of nature and physical activity on emotions and attention

while engaging in green exercise
Ke-Tsung Han
Department of Landscape Architecture, National Chin-Yi University of Technology, No. 57, Sec. 2, Zhongshan Rd., Taiping Dist., Taichung 41170, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Green exercise offers the synergistic benefits of both contact with nature and physical activity for humans.
Received 15 September 2015 This study explored the relationship between nature, physical activity, and well-being, addressing a gap
Received in revised form 6 March 2017 in the research (Hartig et al., 2014). This study further investigated whether and how nature, exercise,
Accepted 7 March 2017
or a combination of both produces these benefits. Nature was quantified as the visible greenness rate to
Available online 12 March 2017
measure the continuum from natural to man-made, instead of using a dichotomization. Physical activ-
ity was walking and jogging, and the exercise level was quantified to measure the continuum from
Keywords:
static to vigorous. Well-being centered on emotions and attention, which have been the most stud-
Actigraph
Backward digit span test ied responses to green exercise, consistent with Ulrich’s (1983) stress reduction theory and Kaplan and
Forward spatial span test Kaplan’s (1989) attention restoration theory. Recruiting 116 college students from a technology univer-
Metabolic equivalents sity in central Taiwan as the participants, this randomized controlled trial conducted field experiments
Movement velocity with a pretest-and-posttest design from October 2013 to February 2014. The participants’ data on emo-
tions were collected by the Chinese version of the Profile of Mood State short form (Chang & Lu, 2001).
Their attention was tested by standardized tests (WMS-III, 1997). The major findings of this study are as
follows. Nature explained 17.9% of the variance, while physical activity explained 9.2% of the variance.
However, one 15-min bout of physical activity with either low or moderate METs (metabolic equivalents,
the energy cost of a physical activity) in a setting with at least 40% visible greenness rate elicited even
more benefits, explaining 58.0% of the variance, more than nature alone. Additionally, a low MET physical
activity like walking was better than a moderate MET physical activity like jogging to improve attention
and emotions without increased fatigue.
© 2017 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Numerous empirical studies support the positive effect of con-
tact with nature on human emotions, physiological equilibrium,
cognition, behaviors, and physical health (Han, 2011). However,
most of these studies focus on the contrasting influences of nat-
ural and built environments. The dichotomy of natural versus
built environments is descriptive and lacks quantitative and objec-
tive measures (cf. Bowler et al., 2010). A simple dichotomization
of natural and built environments is unlikely to provide deeper
insights into what makes settings beneficial for human well-being.
Given that vegetation is the most typical representation of nature
(Smardon, 1988), particularly in built environments, greenness of
settings may be a useful measurement of the natural versus man-
made continuum. The “visible greenness rate”, which quantifies the
amount of vegetation that is visible in the visual field, is a more
E-mail addresses: kthan@ncut.edu.tw, k0h5757@hotmail.com
valid approach than the green cover ratio, which estimates the ratio
of land covered by the vertical projection of the vegetation (Aoki,
1991).
Moreover, when in contact with nature, people usually do not
stay static, but engage in some sort of physical activity. Engage-
ment in physical activity and/or exercise has been shown to benefit
physical and psychological well-being (Maas and Verheij, 2007).
Exercise further helps improve cognitive functioning (Etnier et al.,
1997). Pretty et al. (2005) proposed that “green exercise”, i.e.,
physical activities in settings with a relatively great ratio of nat-
ural to man-made elements in everyday life (Mackay and Neill,
2010), is more beneficial than mere contact with nature or exercis-
ing alone. Therefore, green exercise provides synergistic benefits
above and beyond those provided by either nature or physical
activity, because green exercise includes both (Pretty et al., 2007).
Further, in a review of 59 review articles, Hartig et al. (2014) pro-
posed four major pathways between nature and health/well-being:
stress reduction, physical activity, air quality, and social cohesion.
Thompson Coon et al. (2011) reviewed the green exercise studies

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.03.012
1618-8667/© 2017 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
6 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13
with respect to the two pathways of ‘physical activity’ in ‘natural
environments’ for ‘stress reduction’. The purpose of this study is to
further explore the influence of these two interrelated pathways.
Influences of other pathways from nature to well-being such as air
quality and social cohesion are beyond the scope of this research.
Nevertheless, little research explores the synergistic benefits
of green exercise (Pretty et al., 2005) and/or examines the rela-
tionship between nature, physical activity levels, and well-being
(Hartig et al., 2014). This study, therefore, addresses the following
questions: Is it nature, exercise, or both that produces these ben-
efits? How much does each contribute to those benefits (Mackay
and Neill, 2010)?
In this present study nature is quantified as the visible greenness
rate to measure the continuum from natural to man-made envi-
ronment. Physical activity consists of walking and jogging, two of
the most popular physical activities (Bowler et al., 2010). The exer-
cise level is quantified to measure the continuum from static to
vigorous to prevent a simplified dichotomization of inactive and
active in order to provide deeper insights into how much physi-
cal activity is beneficial for human well-being. Well-being focuses
on emotions and attention, because the World Health Organiza-
tion regards mental health as a state of well-being in which people
can cope with the normal stresses of life and can work produc-
tively (WHO, 2014). Emotions and attention have also been the
most studied responses in empirical research on green exercise,
and are consistent with Ulrich’s (1983) stress reduction theory and
Kaplan and Kaplan’s (1989) attention restoration theory.
1.1. Research hypothesis
The hypothesis of this study was that the influences of visi-
ble greenness rates and physical activity levels on emotions and
attention are different and there are interactions between the
effects of visible greenness rates and physical activity levels when
engaging in green exercise. Since Hartig et al. (2014) propose that
stress reduction and physical activity are intertwined pathways
from nature to well-being, their interactive influences on emo-
tions and attention are assumed. Additionally, given that empirical
research shows that environments with different levels of natu-
ralness (mostly natural versus built) and physical activities with
different exercise levels (such as sedentary versus active) have var-
ious effects on well-being, the existence of an interaction of the
effects of nature and physical activity seems reasonable.
1.2. Benefits of nature
According to a literature review (Han, 2011) of 126 empiri-
cal studies from 1972 to 2007, contact with nature has positive
effects on human emotions. It enhances positive feelings and
reduces negative feelings. It moderates physiological equilibrium
from an over or under physiological mobilization to a normal state,
enables recovery of attention and mitigation of mental fatigue,
and lengthens attention span and enhances reflection. It reduces
aggressiveness and increases social behaviors and physical activ-
ities. It restores diminished functional resources and capabilities,
and reduces duration of hospital stays and body weight.
Two major theories address the benefits of contact with nature:
the stress reduction theory of Ulrich (1983) and the attention
restoration theory of Rachel and Stephen Kaplan (1989). Both
use an evolutionary perspective to suggest that evolutionary
processes enable humans to respond adaptively to nature with
positive responses to the characteristics of natural environments
(Ulrich and Parsons, 1992). Ulrich’s (1983) theory focuses on the
decrease of physiological and psychological stress. He contends
that contact with nature rapidly improves one’s emotions. Positive
emotions then bring about positive motives, physiological equilib-
rium, behavioral impulses, and adaptive behaviors. Nevertheless,
restoration from stress, in Ulrich’s perspective, is not only limited
to recovery from excessive psychological and physiological arousal
but also includes recovery from understimulation or extremely
low psychological and physiological arousal as well as recharging
of energy consumed in psychophysiological reactions to stresses.
Kaplan and Kaplan’s (1989) theory focuses on the cognitive func-
tioning of humans. In their view, attention is depleted after a long
period of continuous use. The results of depleted attention, men-
tal fatigue, cause a negative influence on emotions, behaviors, and
performance. Contact with nature is beneficial for restoring atten-
tion by temporarily not using it because of the positive responses to
and interest in nature characteristic of fascination in a gentle or soft
way. In contrast, man-made environments often take a toll of peo-
ple’s attention due to too many things and too much information
going on in a dramatic or demanding way.
Though the theories of Ulrich (1983) and Kaplan and Kaplan
(1989) have different focuses, they are not incompatible with each
other (Han, 2001). A lack of attention can be regarded as one kind of
stress (Ulrich et al., 1991), which is caused by inadequate adaptive
resources and capabilities (Kaplan, 1995). The pathway between
nature and health/well-being via stress, therefore, includes affec-
tive, cognitive, and physiological restoration (Hartig et al., 2014).
1.3. Benefits of physical activity
Physical activity is helpful for physical health such as mus-
cles and bones, and for avoiding cardiovascular diseases, Type-II
(non-insulin dependent) diabetes, hypertension, colon cancer,
osteoporosis, and obesity (Maas and Verheij, 2007). Physical activ-
ity can also benefit psychological health, improving emotions,
anxiety, depression, self-perception, self-esteem, and sleep qual-
ity (Pretty et al., 2005). Meta-analyses have shown that exercise is
a more effective treatment for depression than no exercise (Rimer
et al., 2012; Stathopoulou et al., 2006). Additionally, according to a
meta-analysis of 134 studies, physical activity is conducive to cog-
nitive functioning with an effect size of 0.25 (Etnier et al., 1997).
The evidence of the psychological benefits of physical activity is,
however, less documented than the physical benefits, but this sub-
ject has been receiving more attention recently (Mackay and Neill,
2010).
As indicated by neuropsychological research, the mecha-
nisms of the benefits of exercise for brain functioning include:
(1) increased cerebral blood flow supplying necessary nutri-
ents such as glucose and oxygen; (2) neurotransmitter release
such as norepinephrine, serotonin, endorphin, dopamine, and
acetylcholine, which influence stress, analgesic, motivation, and
attention; and (3) neurotrophic factors release and synthesis such
as brain-derived neurotrophic factor, insulin-like growth factor,
and vascular endothelial growth factor, which helps cognitive func-
tioning (Deslandes et al., 2009; Etnier et al., 1997).
Additionally, Vaynman and Gomez-Pinilla (2006) proposed that
the influence of exercise on brain and/or cognitive functioning
may be associated with human evolution, because physical activ-
ity is related to survival such as searching for necessities of life
and avoiding dangers (cf. Orians and Heerwagen, 1992). Those
who exercise, thus may have a biological advantage over inactive
persons. Likewise, those who restore their functional capabilities
such as attention and/or emotional and physiological equilibrium
may have an adaptive advantage over those who do not (Ulrich,
1993). The evolutionary perspective, therefore, provides a founda-
tional and meta-theoretical framework that links physical activity,
nature, and well-being. Moreover, since Ulrich (1983) reasons that
stress reduction affects one’s adaptive behaviors, which involve
physical activity, and since Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) see individ-
uals as active restoration seekers, who take action to realize their
 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13
intentions, physical activity also plays a role in their theories. Nev-
ertheless, they have not elaborated the benefits of physical activity
along with stress reduction and attention restoration.
1.4. Benefits of green exercise
Bowler et al. (2010) conducted a review and meta-analysis that
examined the relative benefits of walking and running in natu-
ral and artificial environments on health and well-being. Only 25
journal articles were collected and reviewed by the scholars, in
which natural versus synthetic environments were based on the
authors’ descriptions in terms of greenness. However, the stud-
ies reviewed did not use robust measures of greenness. Of these
studies, 13 applied a crossover trial approach, seven used a ran-
domized controlled trial approach, and five adopted an observation
approach without any control groups. Additionally, 20 of the stud-
ies conducted pretest and posttest comparisons, and their research
participants were mostly college students. Seventeen of the stud-
ies used questionnaires or scales to measure emotions and eight
studies measured attention (six of them used standardized tests
and two used third-party evaluations), including some which mea-
sured physiological conditions such as heartbeat, blood pressure,
hormone levels, and immunity. The studies found that exercising
in a natural environment was more beneficial than exercising in an
artificial environment for anger (Hedges g = 0.28), fatigue (Hedges
g = 0.42), sadness (Hedges g = 0.36), energy (Hedges g = 0.28), and
attention (Hedges g = 0.32).
2. Methods
2.1. Research design
This study applied a randomized controlled design conducting
field experiments in two different environments with a pretest
and posttest before and after performing one bout of two physical
activities (walking and jogging). Objective measures of the inde-
pendent variables (visible greenness rates and physical activity
levels) were combined with a self-report of emotions and stan-
dardized tests of attention before and after performing the physical
activity. One bout of green exercise has been empirically and the-
oretically demonstrated to improve emotions and attention.
2.2. Participants
Participants were recruited at a technology university in central
Taiwan. Students who had physical injuries, asthma (cf. Johansson
et al., 2011), or allergic reactions to sunlight, air, or plants were
excluded due to safety reasons. Moreover, prospective participants
were required to pass the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire
(PAR-Q), which included seven yes/no questions such as “Do you
feel pain in your chest when you do physical activity?” (Canadian
Society for Exercise Physiology, 2002) before they started the
experiments also for safety concerns. As a result, participants were
120 students who passed the PAR-Q evaluation with only one or
no answer of “yes” to the seven questions. They were randomly
assigned to conduct a low-level physical activity (walking) or a
high-level physical activity (jogging) in either a natural (high visible
greenness rate) or a built (low visible greenness rate) environment.
2.3. Research variables and measurements
Naturalness is an important factor that people differentiate
across various settings (Wohlwill, 1983; Knopf, 1987). Thus, vis-
ible greenness was applied to quantify the degree of naturalness of
the natural and the built environments, though they also differed
from each other in many other ways. The visible greenness rate
7
was measured using photos shot with a standard 50-mm-lens dig-
ital camera set at 1.5 m above the ground. To better simulate the
125◦ visual field of human binocular vision (Smardon et al., 1986),
the camera took three photos from left to right, which were com-
bined using Photoshop. The combined photo was then processed
using AutoCAD to calculate the vegetation ratio. The visible green-
ness rate calculated using this method has an error rate of less than
0.5% of the visual ratio (Hong, 2009). Because the participants either
walked or jogged back and forth along the same routes, the photos
were taken along the central line of the lanes of the routes (Fig. 1). A
set of three photos were taken at 100-m intervals along the central
line of the forward lane from the starting point. Similarly, another
set of three photos was taken at 100-m intervals along the cen-
tral line of the return lane from the end point. Therefore, a total
of eight combined photos for each of the two route environments
were taken.
Physical activity level was measured based on data recorded by
the actigraph (AMI MicroMini, New York) and the movement veloc-
ity of the participants. The actigraph is a wristwatch-like device that
measures and records the activity levels of the wearer (Calkins et al.,
2007). This device has previously demonstrated good reliability and
validity (Sadeh, 2011; Stone and Ancoli-Israel, 2011). Usually, the
device is worn on the wrist of the non-dominant hand. Addition-
ally, as movement velocity is one of the most apparent differences
between walking and jogging and one of the most measurable fea-
tures of these two exercises, it was also used to quantify the physical
activity levels of walking and jogging. Movement velocity was cal-
culated by dividing the total round-trip distance of the routes by
the length of time of the exercise in which movement distance was
measured using the Nike+ Running app (Nike, Inc.), one of the most
common mobile GPS apps used by joggers.
The experimental manipulation used in the present study
focused on the visible greenness rate and the physical activity level,
which effectiveness was examined. A t-test was conducted on the
visible greenness rate in both the natural and the built environ-
ments. The results showed a significant difference between the
two environments, with a high effect size (t = −4.749, p = 0.000,
p 2 = 0.617). The visible greenness rate of the natural environment
(M = 64%) was significantly higher than that of the built envi-
ronment (M = 40%). Further, a 1-factor MANOVA was conducted
on participant actigraph data and movement velocity to examine
the difference in physical activity level between walking and jog-
ging. A significant difference was found (Box’s M = 3.666, F = 1.199,
p = 0.309; Pillai’s Trace = 0.771, F(2,113) = 190.257, p = 0.000). Follow-
up tests via ANOVA showed no significant differences for the
actigraph data (F(1,114) = 0.995, p = 0.321, p 2 = 0.009) but found a
significant difference for the movement velocity with a high effect
size (F(1,114) = 376.635, p = 0.000, p 2 = 0.768). Therefore, the exper-
imental manipulation of the physical activity level was effective
based on the movement velocity, as jogging (M = 2.17 m/s) was
faster than walking (M = 1.16 m/s). The physical activity level in
metabolic equivalents (METs), which measures the energy cost of a
physical activity (kcal kg−1 h−1 ), was 3 for walking and 4.5 for jog-
ging (cf. Ainsworth et al., 2000), classified, respectively, as low (<3)
and moderate (3–6) METs (Haskell et al., 2007).
The emotions of participants were measured using the Chi-
nese version of the Profile of Mood State short form (POMS-SF)
(Chang and Lu, 2001) because this measure is often used in stud-
ies of the exercise and emotion relationship (Briddle, 2000). The
Chinese version of the POMS-SF, translated by scholars in Taiwan,
has good reliability and validity (Chang and Lu, 2001; Hsu et al.,
2003) and contains 37 items scored on a 5-point scale (from 0 to
4) covering five negative emotions (confusion, fatigue, anger, ner-
vousness, and frustration) and two positive emotions (energy and
self-dignity). The total mood disturbance (TMD) of the POMS-SF
was also calculated by deducting the total score of the five nega-
8 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13
Fig. 1. Example photos illustrating visible greenness rate.
tive emotions from the total score of the two positive emotions and
then adding 100 points (Heuchert and McNair, 2012). Higher points
indicate greater emotions. The internal consistencies of the pretest
and the posttest of the Chinese version of the POMS-SF (confusion:
0.880, 0.916; fatigue: 0.912, 0.937; anger: 0.767, 0.936; nervous-
ness: 0.732, 0.835; frustration: 0.755, 0.809; energy: 0.926, 0.944;
and self-dignity: 0.710, 0.811) were all acceptable.
The attention of participants was measured using the forward
spatial span test and the backward digit span test of the Wechsler
Memory Scale, Third Edition (WMS-III, 1997). The forward spatial
span test is conducted using a spatial span board with 10 small
blocks. Participants must repeat the sequence of touches given by
the test administrator at the rate of one second per block. The
backward digit span test is a standard clinical examination test for
attention (Lezak, 1983; Mesulam, 1985). Participants must repeat
orally and in reverse a sequence of specific digits spoken by the
test administrator. In this study, these two tests were used to mea-
sure the attention, working memory, and cognitive functioning of
participants. Participants had two practice trials prior to taking
the formal span tests. Participant scores were calculated using the
longest spans of the block or the digit series prior to making two
consecutive incorrect attempts, with higher scores associated with
better attention (WMS-III, 1997).
2.4. Experiment and procedure
The experimental environment in this study included one “natu-
ral” road and one “built” road located on the new and old campuses,
respectively, of a technology university in central Taiwan. Buildings
lined much of the “built” road on both sides, while vegetation lined
much of the “natural” road on both sides. For walking or jogging,
the former thus represented the more built route while the latter
was the most natural. Except for the above major difference, both
roads run parallel to each other with the same relatively east-west
orientation at a distance of about 280 m apart. The experiments in
this study were conducted on a 400-m section of each road, each of
which had two lanes (Fig. 2). The road width of the natural environ-
 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13
Fig. 2. Natural and built environments used in the experiment.
Fig. 3. Timeline of the experimental session.
ment (M = 8.02 m, n = 8) was not significantly different from that of
the built environment (M = 8.27m, n = 8).
The experimental period lasted for five months, from October
2013 (mean temperature 24.9 ◦ C) to February 2014 (mean tem-
perature 17.0 ◦ C), loosely following university’s semester schedule.
Experiments were conducted from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. to fit the
daily schedule of the participating college students.
Participants walked or jogged back and forth along the 400-
m route for 15 min. The 15-min duration was chosen because a
previous study showed that one 15-min bout of green exercise is
sufficient to generate significant psychological and physiological
benefits (Park et al., 2011). Each participant took approximately
40 min to complete the entire experiment, which included filling
out the questionnaire, conducting the green exercise, and taking
the standardized attention tests (Fig. 3).
3. Results
3.1. Participant background
After excluding the participants who did not complete the
experiment, data from 116 valid participants remained, includ-
ing 52 males and 64 females of a mean age of 20.85 (SD = 1.14).
A total of 29 participants (15 males, 14 females) walked in the
natural environment, 29 (11 males, 18 females) jogged in the nat-
ural environment, 32 (13 males, 19 females) walked in the built
environment, and 26 (13 males, 13 females) jogged in the built envi-
ronment. Although participants were randomly assigned to the four
experimental treatments, participant backgrounds were analyzed.
Chi-square tests showed no significant difference between the
groups in terms of gender (␹2 = 1.625, p = 0.654), college attended
(␹2 = 9.555, p = 0.145), and academic year (␹2 = 6.556, p = 0.885).
Additionally, a 2-factor (visible greenness rate × physical activ-
ity level) MANOVA showed no significant difference between the
groups in terms of age, height, and weight (Box’s M = 29.399,
F = 1.553, p = 0.063; Pillai’s Trace ≤ 0.041, F(3,110) ≤ 1.563, p ≥ 0.202,
p 2 ≤ 0.041).
9
3.2. Influences of nature and physical activity on emotions and
attention
To examine the extent of the influences on emotions and atten-
tion produced by green exercise, a 3-factor MANOVA was first
conducted with a mixed design specifying the data from the for-
ward spatial span test, backward digit span test, the seven emotions
of the POMS-SF, and the TMD as dependent variables; visible
greenness rate and physical activity level as independent variables
and independent factors; and time point (pretest and posttest) as
an independent variable and a dependent factor. The results of
this overall MANOVA test showed that: (1) no interactions with
regard to visible greenness rate, physical activity level, and time
point were significant for any of the dependent variables (Pil-
lai’s Trace  0.087, F(9,104)  1.103, p  0.368, p 2  0.087), except
for the interaction of physical activity level and time point, which
was significant for at least one of the dependent variables (Pillai’s
Trace = 0.252, F(9,104) = 3.896, p = 0.000, p 2 = 0.252), and explained
25.2% of the variance; (2) time point was significant for at least one
of the dependent variables (Pillai’s Trace = 0.580, F(9,104) = 15.953,
p = 0.000, p 2 = 0.580), and explained 58.0% of the variance; (3)
visible greenness rate was significant for at least one of the
dependent variables (Pillai’s Trace = 0.179, F(9,104) = 2.524, p = 0.012,
p 2 = 0.179), and explained 17.9% of the variance; and (4) physical
activity level was not significant for any of the dependent variables
(Pillai’s Trace = 0.092, F(9,104) = 1.170, p = 0.322, p 2 = 0.092), though
it explained 9.2% of the variance.
Follow-up tests of ANOVAs were then conducted on the sig-
nificant results from the overall MANOVA test to further examine
which specific dependent variables lead to the overall significance
(Table 1). Because there were 10 dependent variables, the ANOVAs
used a family-wise error rate of 0.05/10 = 0.005 (cf. Wu and Chang,
2011) and follow-up tests were conducted to further check the 95%
confidence interval for differences whenever the p values of the
ANOVAs approximated 0.01 in order to prevent Type II errors. When
the confidence interval included 0, there was no significant differ-
ence between the means of the two populations at the given level
of confidence (Easton and McColl, 1997).
10 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13

Table 1
Significant results of the follow-up ANOVAs focusing on specific dependent variables.

Source of Variation Dependent Variable SS df MS F p p 2

a
Visible Greenness Fatigue 255.592 1 255.592 5.644 0.019 0.048
Rate Nervousnessa 81.153 1 81.153 6.740 0.011 0.057

Time Point Spatial spanb 29.610 1 29.610 14.452 0.000 0.114

Digit spanc 33.999 1 33.999 13.701 0.000 0.109
Confusiona 415.871 1 415.871 56.518 0.000 0.335
Fatiguea 95.161 1 95.161 7.267 0.008 0.061
Nervousnessa 172.572 1 172.572 50.932 0.000 0.313
TMDd 813.786 1 813.786 9.751 0.002 0.080

Physical Activity Level × Time Point Fatiguea 188.813 1 188.813 14.419 0.000 0.114
a
Measured by the Profile of Mood State short form (POMS-SF) (Chang and Lu, 2001).
b
Measured by the forward spatial span test of the Wechsler Memory Scale, Third Edition (WMS-III, 1997).
c
Measured by the backward digit span test of the Wechsler Memory Scale, Third Edition (WMS-III, 1997).
d
The total mood disturbance (TMD) calculated by deducting the total score of the five negative emotions from the total score of the two positive emotions of the POMS-SF
and then adding 100 points (Heuchert and McNair, 2012).

Table 2
Significant results of the follow-up tests for the main effect and pair-wise comparisons with respect to fatigue.

Source of Variation Factor SS df MS F p p 2 Mean S.D. 95% Confidence Interval for

Difference

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Physical Activity Pretest 0.571 1 0.571 0.403 0.527 0.004 2.419a 0.111a −0.298 0.579
Level Posttest 9.184 1 9.184 6.358 0.013 0.053 2.656a 0.112a −1.006 −0.121

Time Point Walking 7.877 1 7.877 0.950 0.334 0.016 7.287 0.639 −0.535 1.551
Jogging 265.827 1 265.827 14.728 0.000 0.214 8.518 0.632 −4.733 −1.485
a
Because of the violation of the premise of equality of covariance matrices, the data on fatigue were transformed into square-root values.

As indicated by the family-wise error rate, the interaction
between physical activity level and time point was significant for
fatigue and not significant for the other nine dependent variables
(F(1,112) ≤ 4.170, p ≥ 0.044). Therefore, follow-up tests were con-
ducted to examine the main effect in order to determine which
physical activity level and which time point lead to the interaction
significance for fatigue. The follow-up tests for the main effect of
fatigue showed no significant difference between physical activity
level in the pretest and a significant difference in the posttest. Fur-
ther, there was no significant difference between the pretest and
the posttest for fatigue from walking, but the pre- and posttest were
significantly different for jogging, with a high effect size. The final
step was to identify which was greater by conducting pairwise com-
parisons. The results showed that posttest fatigue increased more
significantly for jogging (M = 10.07) than for walking (M = 7.03) and
that fatigue more significantly increased in the posttest (M = 8.47)
than in the pretest (M = 7.27) (Table 2).
Likewise, the follow-up ANOVAs on visible greenness rate
focusing on specific dependent variables showed no significant
difference for any of the 10 dependent variables, as indicated by
the family-wise error rate (F(1,112) ≤ 6.740, p ≥ 0.011) (Table 1).
However, pairwise comparisons showed that: (1) fatigue reached
significance at the 95% confidence interval where the difference
did not include 0, and there was a near-medium effect size, with
the natural environment (M = 6.836) lower than the built environ-
ment (M = 8.941) and (2) nervousness reached significance at the
95% confidence interval where the difference did not include 0, and
there was a near-medium effect size, with the natural environment
(M = 4.284) lower than the built environment (M = 5.471) (Table 3).
Similarly, the follow-up ANOVAs on time point focusing on
specific dependent variables showed no significant difference for
energy, self-dignity, anger, fatigue, and frustration (F(1,112) ≤ 7.264,
p ≥ 0.008), and a significant difference for forward spatial span test,
backward digit span test, confusion, nervousness, and TMD, as indi-
cated by the family-wise error rate (Table 1). Pairwise comparisons
showed that: (1) the posttest of the forward spatial span (M = 9.732)
was significantly higher than the pretest (M = 9.015) with a medium
effect size; (2) the posttest of the backward digit span (M = 10.598)
was significantly higher than the pretest (M = 9.830) with a medium
effect size; (3) the posttest of confusion (M = 5.906) was signifi-
cantly lower than the pretest (M = 8.591) with a high effect size;
(4) the posttest of nervousness (M = 4.013) was significantly lower
than the pretest (M = 5.742) with a high effect size; and (5) the
posttest of TMD (M = 101.252) was significantly lower than the
pretest (M = 105.008) with a medium effect size (Table 3). Addi-
tionally, the pairwise comparisons showed that fatigue reached
significance at the 95% confidence interval where the difference did
not include 0, and had a medium effect size, with a posttest value
(M = 8.531) higher than the pretest value (M = 7.246) (Table 3).
4. Discussion
4.1. Experimental manipulation
This study conducted field experiments as demonstrated with
good ecological validity (Cook and Campbell, 1979). The experi-
mental manipulation in this study addressed the issues of visible
greenness rate and physical activity level, which focused on a quan-
titative approach supplemented with objective measures rather
than a qualitative approach exploring dichotomies or categories
such as nature versus built, sedentary versus active, and walk-
ing versus jogging, at an individual level. The results demonstrate
that these manipulations were effective. However, the actigraph
recorded no significant differences in activity level between walk-
ing and jogging. Since the actigraph was worn on the participants’
non-dominant hands, the speeds of hand swinging for participants
who jogged and those who walked were probably similar. In future
studies, the actigraph may be affixed to the participants’ wrists and
 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13 11

Table 3
Significant results of the pairwise comparisons for visible greenness rate and physical activity level.

Dependent Variable Pair Mean SD p p 2 95% Confidence Interval for Difference

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Fatiguea Built 8.941 0.628 0.019 0.048 0.349 3.860

Natural 6.836 0.625 0.019 0.048 −3.860 −0.349

Nervousnessa Built 5.471 0.324 0.011 0.057 0.281 2.091

Natural 4.284 0.322 0.011 0.057 −2.091 −0.281

Spatial Spanb Pretest 9.015 0.169 0.000 0.114 −1.090 −0.343

Posttest 9.732 0.157 0.000 0.114 0.343 1.090

Digit Spanc Pretest 9.830 0.278 0.000 0.109 −1.179 −0.357

Posttest 10.598 0.241 0.000 0.109 0.357 1.179

Confusiona Pretest 8.591 0.508 0.000 0.335 1.977 3.393

Posttest 5.906 0.481 0.000 0.335 −3.393 −1.977

Fatiguea Pretest 7.246 0.492 0.008 0.061 −2.228 −0.340

Posttest 8.531 0.514 0.008 0.061 0.340 2.228

Nervousnessa Pretest 5.742 0.253 0.000 0.313 1.249 2.210

Posttest 4.013 0.264 0.000 0.313 −2.210 −1.249

TMDd Pretest 105.008 1.827 0.002 0.080 1.373 6.139

Posttest 101.252 1.874 0.002 0.080 −6.139 −1.373
a
Measured by the Profile of Mood State short form (POMS-SF) (Chang and Lu, 2001).
b
Measured by the forward spatial span test of the Wechsler Memory Scale, Third Edition (WMS-III, 1997).
c
Measured by the backward digit span test of the Wechsler Memory Scale, Third Edition (WMS-III, 1997).
d
The total mood disturbance (TMD) calculated by deducting the total score of the five negative emotions from the total score of the two positive emotions of the POMS-SF
and then adding 100 points (Heuchert and McNair, 2012).

ankles to measure physical activity levels more comprehensively
(cf. Grap et al., 2011).
4.2. Influences of nature and physical activity on emotions and
attention
The statistical analyses showed that the participants randomly
assigned to the experimental treatments not only had no difference
in their backgrounds but also they had equivalent states of emo-
tions and attention prior to the green exercise. Thus, the outcome
findings of this randomized controlled trial adopting a pretest-and-
posttest repeated-measure design are appropriate to interpret the
causality between nature, physical activity, and well-being. The fol-
lowing discussions will first focus on the significant results and then
on the non-significant results.
The MANOVA results showed that the overall test regarding the
independent variable of nature was significant, explaining 17.9%
of the variance. The follow-up tests showed that participants who
exercised in the natural environment had lower levels of emotions
like fatigue and nervousness than those who exercised in the built
environment (Table 3). This finding supports Ulrich’s (1983) theory,
which emphasizes the emotional benefits of even brief periods of
exposure to nature. Thus, physical activity in a natural setting with
a 64% visible greenness rate had synergistic benefits in emotions
above and beyond physical activity in a built setting with a 40%
visible greenness rate.
An important reason for not identifying more significant results
related to nature may be that the visible greenness rates in the nat-
ural environment and in the built environment were inadequate
to elicit clear differences in participant responses. Although the
visible greenness rate of the natural environment (M = 64%) was sig-
nificantly higher than that of the built environment (M = 40%), the
ratio of the latter was still remarkably higher than the 25% visible
greenness rate noted by Wang (1999) as the minimum threshold for
general self-perceived satisfaction with environmental greening.
In other words, the participants in this study may have perceived
the 40% visible greenness rate in the built environment as rela-
tively natural rather than man-made. This again demonstrates that
natural to man-made is a continuum instead of a dichotomy.
The overall time point test was also significant, explaining
58.0% of the variance. The results of the follow-up tests showed
that participant scores on the forward spatial span test, backward
digit span test, confusion, fatigue, nervousness, and TMD improved
after green exercise (Table 3), which supports the theories of both
Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) and Ulrich (1983). Therefore, regardless
of the physical activity levels as measured by movement velocity
(1.16 m/s vs. 2.17 m/s) and/or METs (3 as low vs. 4.5 as moder-
ate) and exercise types (walking vs. jogging), one 15-min bout of
exercise in settings with at least a 40% visible greenness rate was
beneficial to attention and emotions. Additionally, the overall test
of the interaction between physical activity level and time point
was significant, explaining 25.2% of the variance. The follow-up
tests showed that participant scores for fatigue were higher for
jogging than for walking (Table 3). Thus, low-level physical activ-
ity such as walking (3 METs) was better than a relatively high-level
physical activity such as jogging (4.5 METs) for improving attention
and emotions, and was without increased fatigue.
The non-significant findings of the overall physical activity test
on emotions and attention in this study are likely due to one of the
following two reasons. First, several studies have found emotional
improvements for exercise compared to no exercise (Rimer et al.,
2012; Stathopoulou et al., 2006) but this study examined the influ-
ences of different levels of exercise. This again demonstrated that
physical activity is better operationalized as a continuum rather
than a dichotomy. Second, other studies investigating the relation-
ship between physical activity level and psychological well-being
showed inconclusive results (Mackay and Neill, 2010). For exam-
ple, a meta-analysis of 10 studies, including 1252 opportunistic
sampling survey respondents in the U.K., showed that the relation-
ship between improvements in self-esteem and physical activity
level was linearly negative but that the relationship between the
improvements in TMD and physical activity level formed a U shape
(Barton and Pretty, 2010).
The non-significant findings of the overall test of the interaction
between nature and physical activity on emotions and attention
12 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13
in this study were surprising. However, this does not necessarily
mean that there is no relationship between the two pathways from
nature to well-being, i.e., stress reduction and physical activity, as
proposed by Hartig et al. (2014). One possible reason may because
the uncertain relationship between physical activity level and psy-
chological well-being makes the interaction between nature and
physical activity on well-being even more difficult to clearly iden-
tify. Among the four studies on this subject reviewed by Hartig
et al. (2014), only one suggested that the relationship between
nature and health was mediated by walking (Sugiyama et al., 2008).
Another study found a complementary interaction between nature
and physical activity level regarding the improvement in autistic
children’s school adaptation (Han, 2014). The relationship between
the two intertwined pathways from nature to well-being, stress
reduction and physical activity, awaits further investigation.
4.3. Limitations
Because this study was conducted on a university campus with
college students, the results of this study may not be generalizable
to other environments, participant groups, or physical activities.
Additionally, the visible greenness rate of the experimental envi-
ronments was only measured once, at the beginning of the 5-month
experimental period. While it was unlikely that the variations in the
visible greenness rate altered the distinction between the natural
and the built environments, greater caution and consideration with
regard to this issue may be afforded in future studies.
Moreover, the fence and the road in the natural environment
may affect participant perception of the level of naturalness of the
“nature” road. The fence (1.8 m in height) protects the reserved area
of the new campus from human disturbance, and is supposed to be
the most natural area of the entire university. Although the fence
allows visible access to the greenness, it may still affect the percep-
tion of the level of “nature”. Although the visible greenness rate of
the natural environment as objectively measured was statistically
and significantly higher than that of the man-made environment
with a high effect size, perceived naturalness, visible greenness
rate, and actual nature still may not be the same (cf. Ode et al.,
2009). Though the two selected roads might not be the best exam-
ples of natural and built settings, they were significantly different
from each other in visible greenness rate but shared many sim-
ilarities such as location, orientation, width, weather, air quality,
and the distance that the participants traveled to the experimental
sites.
4.4. Suggestions
Future research on green exercise may: (1) use quantitative
measures of nature such as the visible greenness rate, level of
succession, and/or biodiversity to more finely distinguish natural
from built settings as a continuum; (2) use precise, quantitative
measures of physical activity levels such as MET minutes (time
engaged in an activity with consideration to the number of METs)
(cf. Bushman, 2012); (3) cover a wide range of physical activities,
environments, and participants; (4) examine the immediate influ-
ences of a single bout of green exercise and the long-term influences
of repeated green exercise (cf. Bowler et al., 2010; Reed et al., 2013;
Thompson Coon et al., 2011); (5) continually monitor nature and
the responses of participants when exploring the long-term effects
(cf. Han, 2009); and (6) investigate the relationships between the
four intertwined pathways, i.e., stress reduction, physical activity,
air quality, and social cohesion, from nature to health/well-being
(Hartig et al., 2014).
5. Conclusions
This study investigated the relationship between nature, phys-
ical activity, and well-being. The hypothesis of this study was
partially supported by the finding that the effects of visible green-
ness rates on emotions and attention (17.9% of the variance
explained) were greater than those of physical activity levels (9.2%
of the variance explained) but there was no interaction between
visible greenness rates and physical activity levels when engag-
ing in green exercise. Thus, nature alone contributed more benefits
than physical activity alone. However, one 15-min bout of physical
activity with either low or moderate METs in a setting with at least
40% visible greenness rate, i.e., green exercise, elicited even more
benefits (58.0% of the variance explained) in emotions and atten-
tion than nature alone. Additionally, a low MET physical activity
like walking was better than a moderate MET physical activity like
jogging to improve attention and emotions, and did not increase
fatigue. Thus, individuals should be encouraged to conduct low-
level physical activity for just 15 min in a relatively natural setting
to improve well-being. Policymakers and organizational managers
should not ignore the benefits of green exercise, because it is a
matter of public health.
Acknowledgements
This study is the partial results of the research project (NSC 102-
2410-H-167-008), which is supported by a grant from National
Science Council, Executive Yuan, R.O.C., and much gratitude is
expressed hereby to the NSC for its funding. The sponsor had no
involvement in the study design, in the collection, analysis and
interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the deci-
sion to submit the article for publication.
References
Ainsworth, B.E., Haskell, W.L., Whitt, M.C., Irwin, M.L., Swartz, A.M., Strath, S.J.,
O’Brien, W.L., Bassett, D.R., Schmitz, K.H., Emplaincourt, P.O., Jacobs, D.R., Leon,
A.S., 2000. Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and
MET intensities. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 32, S498–S516.
Aoki, Y., 1991. Evaluation methods for landscape with greenery. Landsc. Res. 16,
3–6.
Barton, J., Pretty, J., 2010. What is the best dose of nature and green exercise for
improving mental health? A multi-study analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44,
3947–3955.
Bowler, D.E., Buyung-Ali, L.M., Knight, T.M., Pullin, A.S., 2010. A systematic review
of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural
environments. BMC Public Health 10, 456–465.
Briddle, S.J.H., 2000. Emotion, mood and physical activity. In: Briddle, S.J.H., Fox,
K.R., Boutcher, S.H. (Eds.), Physical Activity and Psychological Well-Being.
Routledge, London, pp. 63–87.
Bushman, B.A., 2012. How can I use METS to quantify the amount of aerobic
exercise. ACSM’s Health Fit. J. 16, 5–7.
Calkins, M., Szmerekovsky, J.G., Biddle, S., 2007. Effect of increased time spent
outdoors on individuals with dementia residing in nursing homes. J. Hous.
Elder. 21, 211–228.
Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology, 2002. Physical Activity Readiness
Questionnaire, PAR-Q.
Chang, Y.-C., Lu, J.-H., 2001. The revised report of profile of mood state (POMS).
Sports Exerc. Res. 3, 47–55.
Cook, T.D., Campbell, D.T., 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues
for Field Settings. Hougton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Deslandes, A., Moraes, H., Ferreira, C., Veiga, H., Silveira, H., Mouta, R., Pompeu, F.A.,
Coutinho, E.S., Laks, J., 2009. Exercise and mental health: many reasons to
move. Neuropsychobiology 59, 191–198.
Easton, V.J., McColl, J.H., 1997. Statistics Glossary. Steps.
Etnier, J.L., Salazar, W., Landers, D.M., 1997. The influence of physical fitness and
exercise upon cognitive functioning: a meta-analysis. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 9,
249–277.
Grap, M.J., Hamilton, V.A., McNallen, A., Ketchum, J.M., Best, A.M., Isti Arief, N.Y.,
Wetzel, P.A., 2011. Actigraphy: analyzing patient movement. Heart Lung: J.
Acute Crit. Care 40, 52–59.
Han, K.-T., 2001. A review: theories of restorative environments. J. Ther. Hortic. 12,
30–43.
 K.-T. Han / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 24 (2017) 5–13
Han, K.-T., 2009. Influence of limitedly visible leafy indoor plants on the
psychology, behavior, and health of students at a junior high school in Taiwan.
Environ. Behav. 41, 658–692.
Han, K.-T., 2011. Restorative Nature: An Overview of the Positive Influences of
Natural Landscapes on Humans. Lambert Academic Publishing, German.
Han, K.-T., 2014. Influences of green exercise on school adaptation of autistic
children in Taiwan. J. Ther. Hortic. 24, 5–24.
Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S., Frumkin, H., 2014. Nature and health. Annu. Rev.
Public Health 35, 207–228.
Haskell, W.L., Lee, I.-M., Pate, R.P., Powell, K.E., Blair, S.N., Franklin, B.A., Macera,
C.A., Heath, G.W., Thompson, P.D., Bauman, A., 2007. Physical activity and
public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College
of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
39, 1423–1434.
Heuchert, J.P., McNair, D.M., 2012. Profile of Mood States 2nd Edition-Youth. POMS
2-Y Assessment Report for Derrick Smith.1–6.
Hong, X.-M., 2009. A Study on Restoration Effects of Greening Levels of Plant at
Indoor Working Environment. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. University of
FengChia.
Hsu, P.-Y., Chang, Y.-C., Lu, J.-H., 2003. The re-revised profile of mood states
(PMOS). Sports Exerc. Res. 5, 85–95.
Johansson, M., Hartig, T., Staats, H., 2011. Psychological benefits of walking:
moderation by company and outdoor environment. Appl. Psychol.: Health
Well-Being 3, 261–280.
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., 1989. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective.
Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Kaplan, S., 1995. The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative
framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 15, 169–182.
Knopf, R.C., 1987. Human behavior, cognition, and affect in the natural
environment. In: Stokols, D., Altman, I. (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental
Psychology, vol. I. John Wily & Sons, New York, NY, pp. 783–825.
Lezak, M.D., 1983. Neuropsychological Assessment. Oxford University Press, New
York, NY.
Maas, J., Verheij, R.A., 2007. Are health benefits of physical activity in natural
environments used in primary care by general practitioners in The
Netherlands? Urban For. Urban Green. 6, 227–233.
Mackay, G.J.S., Neill, J.T., 2010. The effect of green exercise on state anxiety and the
role of exercise duration, intensity, and greenness: a quasi-experimental study.
Psychol. Sport Exerc. 11, 238–245.
Mesulam, M., 1985. Principles of Behavioral Neurology. F.A. Davis, Philadelphia, PA.
Ode, A., Fry, G., Tveit, M.S., Messager, P., Miller, D., 2009. Indicators of perceived
naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. J. Environ. Manage. 90,
375–383.
Orians, G.H., Heerwagen, J.H., 1992. Evolved responses to landscapes. In: Barkow,
J.H., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J. (Eds.), The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology
and the Generation of Culture. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp.
555–579.
Park, B.J., Furuya, K., Kasetani, T., Takayama, N., Kagawa, T., Miyazaki, Y., 2011.
Relationship between psychological responses and physical environment in
forest settings. Landsc. Urban Plann. 102, 24–32.
Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Sellengs, M., Griffen, M., 2005. The mental and physical health
outcomes of green exercise. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 15, 319–337.
Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Hine, R., Sellens, M., South, N., Griffen, M., 2007. Green exercise
in the UK countryside: effects on health and psychological well-being and
implications for policy and planning. J. Environ. Plann. Manage. 50, 211–231.
13
Reed, K., Wood, C., Barton, J., Pretty, J.N., Cohen, D., Sandercock, G.R.H., 2013. A
repeated measures experiment of green exercise to improve self-esteem in UK
school children. PLoS One 8, e69176, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0069176.
Rimer, J., Dwan, K., Lawlor, D.A., Greig, C.A., McMurdo, M., Morley, W., Mead, G.E.,
2012. Exercise for depression. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/14651858, Art. No.: CD004366. pub5.
Sadeh, A., 2011. The role and validity of actigraphy in sleep medicine: an update.
Sleep Med. Rev. 15, 259–267.
Smardon, R.C., 1988. Perception and aesthetics of the urban environments: review
of the role of vegetation. Landsc. Urban Plann. 15, 85–106.
Smardon, R.C., Palmer, J.F., Felleman, J.P., 1986. Foundations for Visual Project
Analysis. McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Stathopoulou, G., Powers, M., Berry, A., Smits, J., Otto, M., 2006. Exercise
interventions for mental health: a quantitative review. Clin. Psychol.: Sci. Pract.
13, 179–193.
Stone, K.L., Ancoli-Israel, S., 2011. Actigraphy. In: Kryger, M. (Ed.), Principles and
Practice of Sleep Medicine. Elsevier.
Sugiyama, T., Leslie, E., Giles-Corti, B., Owen, N., 2008. Associations of
neighbourhood greenness with physical and mental health: do walking, social
coherence and local social interaction explain the relationships? J. Epidemiol.
Community Health 62, e9.
Thompson Coon, J.T., Boddy, K., Stein, K., Whear, R., Barton, J., Depledge, M.H.,
2011. Does participating in physical activity in outdoor natural environments
have a greater effect on physical and mental wellbeing than physical activity
indoors? A systematic review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 1761–1772.
Ulrich, R.S., 1983. Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In:
Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F. (Eds.), Behavior and Natural Environments. Plenum,
New York, NY, pp. 85–125.
Ulrich, R.S., 1993. Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In: Kellert, S.R.,
Wilsons, E.O. (Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island/Shearwater Press,
Washington, DC, pp. 73–137.
Ulrich, R.S., Parsons, R., 1992. Influences of passive experiences with plants on
individual well-being and health. In: Relt, P. (Ed.), The Role of Horticulture in
Human Well-Being and Social Development. Timber Press, Portland, OR, pp.
93–105.
Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B.D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M.A., Zelson, M., 1991. Stress
recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J. Environ.
Psychol. 11, 201–230.
Vaynman, S., Gomez-Pinilla, F., 2006. Revenge of the ‘sit’: how lifestyle impacts
neuronal and cognitive health through molecular systems that interface
energy metabolism with neuronal plasticity. J. Neurosci. Res. 84, 699–715.
Wang, H.-L., 1999. A study of the greenness visual evaluations of urban parks. J.
Des. 4, 61–89.
Wechsler, D., 1997. Wechsler Memory Scale-Third Edition (WMS-III). The
Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, TX.
Wohlwill, J.F., 1983. The concept of nature: a psychologist’s view. In: Altman, I.,
Wohlwill, J.F. (Eds.), Human Behavior and Environment: Behavior and the
Natural Environment, vol. VI. Plenum Press, New York, NY, pp. 1–34.
World Health Organization, 2014. Mental Health: A State of Well-Being, Retrieved
3 January 2017 from http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/mental health/en/.
Wu, M.-L., Chang, Y.-R., 2011. SPSS and Statistical Analysis Application. Wunan
Press, Taipei.