This study explores the relationship between greenspace and perceived stress, anxiety, and depression, and specifically how perceived and objective greenspace exposure relate to these outcomes. It also explores whether race and socioeconomic status (SES) influence perceived and objective greenspace exposure.

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the daily lives of people, and countries worldwide have implemented public health measures that restricted social contact and interactions. Individuals in isolation displayed increased mental health issues, for whom windows are a crucial means of connecting with the outside world. However, few studies have discussed the effect of having a window view on the mental health of individuals in quarantine. This study uses a natural experiment to address this knowledge gap. Between January 27, 2022 and June 19, 2022, individuals in Taiwan who were assigned to quarantine hotel room with various window views were recruited through Facebook groups. Participants completed a baseline assessment at the beginning of their quarantine period that included room and window conditions and mental health conditions, followed by a posttest assessment of the same mental health measures. Questions related to window conditions included the proportions of natural and urban landscapes viewable from their hotel windows, human activities they could observe (flow of people), and their viewshed broadness. Subsequently, this study investigated how visual access to greenness influenced the positive mental health, depression, and stress of the participants before and during quarantine. In total, 81 participants participated. The results of this study indicated that viewing vegetation and the ratio of windows to walls were associated with improved mental health, reduced symptoms of depression, and reduced stress. Specifically, an open view in the room was associated with lower levels of depression ( < 0.001) and stress ( < 0.000). Additionally, viewing people through windows was associated with reduced depressive symptoms ( < 0.006). The results of this study can inform policies for pandemic containment, but also broadly for health care, hospitals, and other related fields.

There is increasing recognition that people are experiencing stress and anxiety around climate change, and that this climate stress/anxiety may be associated with more pro-environmental behavior. However, less is known about whether people's own environmental exposures affect climate stress/anxiety or the relationship between climate stress/anxiety and civic engagement. Using three waves of survey data (2020-2022) from the nationally representative Tufts Equity in Health, Wealth, and Civic Engagement Study of US adults (n = 1071), we assessed relationships among environmental exposures (county-level air pollution, greenness, number of toxic release inventory sites, and heatwaves), self-reported climate stress/anxiety, and civic engagement measures (canvasing behavior, collaborating to solve community problems, personal efficacy to solve community problems, group efficacy to solve community problems, voting behavior). Most participants reported experiencing climate stress/anxiety (61%). In general, the environmental exposures we assessed were not significantly associated with climate stress/anxiety or civic engagement metrics, but climate stress/anxiety was positively associated with most of the civic engagement outcomes (canvassing, personal efficacy, group efficacy, voter preference). Our results support the growing literature that climate stress/anxiety may spur constructive civic action, though do not suggest a consistent relationship between adverse environmental exposures and either climate stress/anxiety or civic engagement. Future research and action addressing the climate crisis should promote climate justice by ensuring mental health support for those who experience climate stress anxiety and by promoting pro-environmental civic engagement efforts.

The COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown restrictions prolonged residents' exposure to their home environment. The impact of lockdowns could be heightened for apartment residents as they typically have smaller, less versatile homes, and share communal and circulation spaces. This study examined changes in apartment residents' perceptions and experiences of their dwelling before and after the Australian COVID-19 national lockdown.

Primary stressors are direct outcomes of extreme events (e.g., viruses, floodwater) whereas secondary stressors stem from pre-disaster life circumstances and societal arrangements (e.g., illness, problematic pre-disaster policies) or from inefficient responses to the extreme event. Secondary stressors can cause significant long-term damage to people affected but are also tractable and amenable to change. In this study we explored the association between secondary stressors, social identity processes, social support, and perceived stress and resilience. Pre-registered analyses of data from the COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey Round II ( = 14,600; 43 countries) show that secondary stressors are positively associated with perceived stress and negatively associated with resilience, even when controlling for the effects of primary stressors. Being a woman or having lower socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with higher exposure to secondary stressors, higher perceived stress, and lower resilience. Importantly, social identification is positively associated with expected support and with increased resilience and lower perceived stress. However, neither gender, SES, or social identification moderated the relationship between secondary stressors and perceived stress and resilience. In conclusion, systemic reforms and the availability of social support are paramount to reducing the effects of secondary stressors.

Social interaction is significant for individuals' mental and psychological well-being in communities. With the growing demand for outdoor activities in urban settings under the COVID‑19 pandemic, urban parks have become important public resources for human social activities. Researchers have developed numerous instruments to measure park use behaviors, but most are designed for assessing physical activity while ignoring social interactive behaviors. Despite the importance, no single protocol objectively assesses the range of social interactions in urban outdoor environments. To bridge the research gap, we have developed a social interaction scale (SIS) based on Parten's scheme. The innovative protocol, named Systematically Observing Social Interaction in Parks (SOSIP) was developed based on the SIS, allowing systematic evaluation of human's interactive behaviors in outdoor environment both from their levels of social interaction and group size. The psychometric properties of SOSIP were established through the verification of content validity and reliability tests. Additionally, we applied SOSIP to explore relationships between park features and social interaction via hierarchical linear models (HLMs). Statistical comparisons between SOSIP and other forms of social interaction were discussed and indicated strong reliability of applying SOSIP. The results indicated SOSIP is a valid and reliable protocol for objectively assessing social interactive behaviors within urban outdoor environments and informing better understanding of individuals' mental and psychological health benefits.

The COVID-19 outbreak led to major restrictions globally, affecting people's psychosocial health and their health behaviors. Thus, the purpose of this scoping review was to summarize the available research regarding nature and health in the COVID-19 context. Keywords relating to natural environments and COVID-19 were combined to conduct a systematic online search in six major databases. Eligibility criteria were a) published since 2020 with data collected in the COVID-19 context b) peer-reviewed, c) original empirical data collected on human participants, d) investigated the association between natural environments and psychosocial health or health behaviors, and e) English, German, or Scandinavian languages. Out of 9126 articles being screened, we identified 188 relevant articles, representing 187 distinct studies. Most research focused on adults in the general population and was predominantly conducted in the USA, Europe, and China. Overall, the findings indicate that nature may mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on psychological health and physical activity. Through a systematic thematic analysis of the extracted data, three primary themes were identified: 1) type of nature assessed, 2) psychosocial health and health behaviors investigated, and 3) heterogeneity in the nature-health relationship. Research gaps in the COVID-19 context were identified regarding I) nature characteristics that promote psychosocial health and health behaviors, II) investigations of digital and virtual nature, III) psychological constructs relating to mental health promotion, IV) health-promoting behaviors other than physical activity, V) underlying mechanisms regarding heterogeneity in the nature-health relationship based on human, nature, and geographic characteristics, and VI) research focusing on vulnerable groups. Overall, natural environments demonstrate considerable potential in buffering the impact of stressful events on a population level on mental health. However, future research is warranted to fill the mentioned research gaps and to examine the long-term effects of nature exposure during COVID-19.

Every year, millions of children seek care in emergency departments (EDs) for various conditions. Though the physical environment of the ED provides the context and setting for care delivery, influences workflows, and shapes interactions between users, the noisy, sterile, stimulating nature of the ED can be counter-therapeutic to pediatric patients and families. This systematic literature review investigates this complex dynamic and asks how the physical environment of emergency departments affects children and their families or guardians. Using PRISMA methods, this review searched four databases to identify and analyze twenty-one peer-reviewed articles that explored the impacts of the physical environment of hospital-based EDs on children or family members. Several themes emerged from the literature - concerning control, positive distractions, family and social supports, and designing for a safe and comfortable experience - that illustrate opportunities for future ED design and highlight knowledge gaps and avenues for future research.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has been found to undermine mental health, it is unclear how it may impact individuals' motivation to tackle other global crises. There are at least two perspectives on how COVID-19 might psychologically impact how people respond to other global crises. The finite-pool-of-worry hypothesis suggests that worrying about one issue might diminish worry about other issues since individuals have a limited capacity of worry. Conversely, the affect-generalization hypothesis advocates that worry about an issue might generalize to other issues and increase general levels of worry. To test these competing hypotheses, the present research investigated how threats activated by the COVID-19 pandemic might affect individuals' interest in and motivation to address climate change (Study 1) and the refugee crisis (Study 2) by assessing pro-environmental behavior and prosocial behavior toward refugees, respectively. The results showed that exposure to COVID-19 threats elevated anxiety levels, and trait anxiety, psychological distance, and future orientation moderated this effect. While COVID-19 threats did not influence pro-environmental and prosocial behavior and intentions, exploratory analyses uncovered that being psychologically closer to COVID-19 might predict an increase in pro-environmental and prosocial behavior and intentions, pointing to the affect-generalization hypothesis.

In 2020, COVID-19 mitigation measures, including lockdowns and travel bans to curtail disease transmission, inadvertently led to an "Anthropause" - a unique global pause to anthropogenic activities. While there was a spike in ecological studies measuring Anthropause effects on environmental indicators, people's experiences of the Anthropause or its potential to inspire change were hardly considered. Hence, we aimed to measure people's appreciation of the environmental outcomes of the Anthropause, ecophilosophical contemplations about the pandemic, and experiences of lockdown-triggered biophilia (human's innate love for and draw towards nature) and test the hypothesis that these experiences would be consistently more prominent among the already environmentally inclined. To that end, we developed and tested three measures on a representative sample of 993 New Zealanders. Anthropause Appreciation received the highest overall mean ratings, followed by Lockdown-Biophilia and Eco-Contemplation. Pre-existing pro-environmental dispositions and behaviours did not consistently influence our three measures as expected. Demographic variables had little influence, while experiences of financial and mental health impacts due to COVID-19 had no influence. We interpreted the limited influence of explanatory variables as indicative of a degree of uniformity in people's experiences. High appreciation of Anthropause benefits suggests that the public may be supportive of policies and ways of living that can lead to similar outcomes post-pandemic - offering environmental policymakers and communicators a basis for action. Ecophilosophical contemplations and biophilic draw among the public suggest an awareness of the significance of the human-nature relationship - offering a symbolic global keystone for communicating and advocating conservation and the many values of pauses in life to connect with nature. Building women's environmental leadership capabilities and the ongoing greening of Christianity may be essential steps for global post-pandemic environmental behaviour transformations.

Both crises, the climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic need collective mitigation support. In the context of COVID-19, the support of mitigation strategies has found its way to the forefront of debates. Our aim was to contribute empirical evidence to this debate by investigating mitigation behaviors across both crises and discussing similarities and differences. To this end, we drew on the Norm Activation Model and the concept of Social Identity to understand individuals' support of mitigation strategies in the climate crisis and their support of governmental strategies to mitigate the spread of the virus. Data were gathered within a Germany-wide survey ( = 3092) carried out in June and July 2020. Three predictors significantly explained the support of mitigation strategies in both crises: (1) by the pandemic emerged as the strongest predictor for support of COVID-19 mitigation strategies, whereas (2) with others making efforts to mitigate the climate crisis was the strongest predictor for support of climate crisis mitigation strategies. (3) that together with others one can make a substantial contribution to mitigate the respective crisis predicted support of mitigation strategies in the COVID-19 pandemic and the climate crisis to similar proportions. The results point to the need for targeting the communication of mitigation strategies in a pandemic on raising awareness for the collective nature of the problem whereas strengthening efficacy expectations and feelings of belonging, e.g. through participation processes, could generally strengthen the support of mitigation strategies in both crises.

Meditation training may promote pro-environmental behavior and related variables, though limited research has tested this experimentally. We investigated whether short- or long-term meditation training were associated with pro-environmental behavior, environmental attitudes, and sustainable well-being (i.e., well-being per unit consumption). In a cross-sectional comparison, long-term meditators (=31; mean=9,154 meditation hours) displayed greater environmental attitudes (=0.63) but not pro-environmental behavior or sustainable well-being compared to meditation-naïve participants (s-0.14-0.27). In a randomized controlled trial (=125), eight-week training in Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction did not significantly improve target variables relative to waitlist or structurally-matched active control (s=-0.38-0.43). However, relative to waitlist, randomization to meditation or active control predicted increases in pro-environmental behavior (=-0.40) and sustainable well-being (=0.42), although the latter finding was not robust to multiple imputation. While meditation training may promote pro-environmental behavior and its antecedents, the training investigated here does not appear to be uniquely effective.

In an earlier cross-sectional study, Roccato et al. (2021) showed that household crowding during the COVID-19 lockdown was positively related to support for anti-democratic political systems. However, little is known about the persistence of these effect over time. In this study, we examined its duration in a longitudinal study structured in five waves, the first in May-June 2019 (before the COVID-19 outbreak,  = 1504) and the others during the pandemic, in April 2020 (during the lockdown,  = 1199), October 2020 ( = 1156), April 2021 ( = 1148), and October 2021 ( = 1151). The increase in support for anti-democratic systems associated with household overcrowding in the initial phase of the lockdown (Wave 2) did not change over the subsequent 17 months. Moreover, the effect was stronger among those who had high (compared with low) trust in democratic political institutions before the pandemic. Strengths, limitations, and potential developments of the study are discussed.

The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced the daily lives of people and may affect their well-being. The aim of the present study is to assess well-being and associated factors during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the general population in three European countries.

Lockdown policies aimed at decreasing the transmission of COVID-19 showed unintended mental health consequences; however, natural settings may offer a respite for individuals suffering from depression or anxiety symptoms. Previous cross-sectional literature reports protective effects of outdoor exposure on mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. We longitudinally assess whether green exercise corresponded with a decline in adverse mental health symptoms, controlling for state lockdown policies. We also examine whether the relation differed by state lockdown status. As our exposure variable, we specificized participation in an outdoor walk, jog, or hike (green exercise). We used, as the outcome variable, the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) to measure anxiety and depression symptoms. We utilized the Understanding America Study (UAS), a nationally representative sample of 8253 adults across 50 states in the US, surveyed biweekly between March 10, 2020-May 26, 2021. Linear fixed effect analyses controlled for time-invariant individual factors, as well as employment status, and household income. Regression results indicate a modest decline in PHQ-4 scores of approximately 0.10 (less mental health symptoms) as a function of green exercise, controlling for state lockdown status. We also find a slightly greater protective effect of green exercise on mental health symptoms during state lockdown policies. Additionally, we find that green exercise, as opposed to indoor exercise, corresponds with a decrease in PHQ-4 scores during lockdown. Contact with nature may improve mood and decrease mental health symptoms, especially during stress-inducing periods such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Green exercise as a recommended behavioral intervention may hold relevance for greater public health.

Previous research indicates that employees' mental health might be influenced by their satisfaction with physical office characteristics, such as noise, daylight, and ventilation. However, similar research on mental health in relation to working from home (WFH) is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the relationships between satisfaction with physical home workspace characteristics and support of work activities and mental health while WFH during the COVID-19 pandemic. Relationships were analysed using a path analysis approach, based on a sample of 1219 office workers, who had to work fully from home. The internal relationships between the ten considered mental health variables were also studied. Results showed that satisfaction with daylight, artificial light, greenery, and views outside were directly related to one of the mental health variables and indirectly to several others. Surprisingly, satisfaction with temperature, noise, ventilation, and air quality did not seem to play a role at the home workplace. In addition, unlike at the office, personal characteristics did not relate to workspace satisfaction nor perceived support of activities at home. Furthermore, all mental health variables were related to at least one other mental health variable. Workplace managers could use these insights to formulate recommendations for employees on how to design their home-workspace.

Policies to reduce meat consumption are needed to help achieve climate change targets, and could also improve population health. Public acceptability can affect the likelihood of policy implementation. This study estimated the acceptability of policies to reduce red and processed meat consumption, and whether acceptability differed when policies were framed as benefitting health or the environment. In an online experiment, 2215 UK adults rated the acceptability of six policies, presented in a randomised order. Prior to rating policies, participants were randomised to one of two framing conditions, with policy outcomes described either as benefitting health or the environment. Regression models examined differences in the primary outcome - policy acceptability (rated on a 7-point scale) - by framing. Labels were the most accepted policy (48% support), followed by a media campaign (45%), reduced availability (40%) and providing incentives (38%). Increasing price (27%) and banning advertising (26%) were the least accepted. A substantial proportion of participants neither supported nor opposed most policies (26-33%), although this fell to 16% for increasing price. There was no evidence that framing policy benefits from a health or environment perspective influenced acceptability (-0.06, 95%CIs: 0.18,0.07). Fewer than half of the UK sample expressed support for any of six policies to reduce meat consumption, regardless of framing measures as benefitting health or the environment. Conversely, fewer than half expressed opposition, with the exception of price, suggesting considerable scope to influence public opinion in support of meat reduction measures to meet environmental and health goals.

The literature shows that threats unrelated to environmental problems can shift attention away from these problems and affect pro-environmental behavior. It is not clear whether the COVID-19 crisis that started in 2019 had any uniform effect on pro-environmental behavior and decision making. In two preregistered panel studies conducted before and during the first COVID wave (1 = 206, 2 = 164) and before and during the second COVID wave (3 = 4 = 260), we found that the crisis had had no uniform effect on pro-environmental behaviors, environmental attitude, nor on the behavioral costs of general pro-environmental behavior. Analysis of one specific pro-environmental behavior, the choice of environmentally friendly delivery of products, revealed that the general preference for green delivery services and heightened preference for green delivery services among people with higher attitude levels remained unchanged by the COVID-19 crisis. Thus, if the COVID-19 crisis has had any effects on pro-environmental behaviors, these effects are probably fragmented, specific to certain population segments, and not visible in the short-term perspective.

Essential workers such as medical workers and police officers are first-line fighters during public-health crises, such as COVID-19 pandemic. Every time, they are under heavy stress both physically and mentally. The goal of the present study was to develop a novel nature-based intervention to promote their well-being. A representative sample of essential workers in China was recruited for a five-day intervention program, and were randomly assigned to two groups. The experimental group watched 2-min video clips of natural scenes every day, while the control group watched urban scenes. Results indicated that after five days, the natural stimuli intervention yielded overall improvements in various indices of subjective well-being. Furthermore, analyses of nested longitudinal data confirmed that everyday nature stimuli exposure provided both immediate and repeated restorative benefits. The proposed natural-based intervention is brief and easy-to-use, offering a cost-efficient psychological booster to promote subjective well-being of essential workers during this crisis time.

Prolonged periods of restrictions on people's freedom of movement during the first massive wave of the COVID-19 pandemic meant that most people engaged in all their daily activities at home. This suggested the need for the spatial features of the home and its occupants' perception of them to be investigated in terms of people's wellbeing. The present study was conducted on a large sample (N = 1354) drawn from different Italian regions. It examined the relationship between the "objective" and "subjective" dimensions of the home, measured in terms of objective home crowding and satisfaction with the space at home, in relation to perceived stress and the perceived risk of COVID-19 infection during the lockdown. The results showed that perceived stress is influenced by objective home crowding through the mediation of satisfaction with the space at home. These associations were more pronounced in younger generations. The negative association between satisfaction with the space at home and perceived stress was higher, the lower the perceived COVID-19 risk.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic claimed millions of lives and caused unprecedented disruptions. Despite these negative impacts, there is optimism the pandemic may shift public opinion on other global crises by fostering a sense of collective efficacy. Using propensity score matching to compare New Zealanders assessed before (n =12,304) and after (n = 12,370) nationwide lockdowns in 2020, we tested a preregistered mediation model with COVID-19 lockdown experience predicting increases in pro-environmental attitudes via enhanced socio-political efficacy. As hypothesized, socio-political efficacy increased after the successful nationwide lockdowns. In turn, socio-political efficacy amplified respondents' pro-environmental attitudes including climate beliefs and concern, as well as support for a government subsidy for public transport and opposition to government spending on new motorways. The pandemic also enhanced respondents' satisfaction with the quality of the natural environment, which was unmediated by socio-political efficacy. The crisis might offer an opportunity to foster collective pro-environmental actions.

In France, the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdown measures have created unprecedented circumstances that increase stress and anxiety, thus leading individuals experiencing home confinement to adopt various coping strategies that contribute to building resilience. Given the novelty and recency of the COVID-19 lockdown, factors of coping and resilience in this specific context of home confinement remain undefined. Based on some recent observations, we conducted a study on a convenience sample in France ( = 809) in order to investigate two potential factors of lockdown resilience and coping: social position and household affordances, while also exploring some complementary hypotheses based on the literature. Social position and household affordances were identified as significant predictors of lockdown coping and resilience, and low social position was found to coincide with less social support coping strategies. Results are discussed in relation to the theory and the limits identified in this study. Recommendations are made for potential second waves of COVID-19 spread or similar pandemics in the future.

This study investigated how contact with nature benefitted well-being during a strict lockdown. The study took place in Israel during the last week of the first COVID-19 lockdown, when citizens were restricted to remain within 100 m of home. A survey company distributed questionnaires among 776 individuals. The questionnaires included demographic variables (gender, ethnic and cultural groups, age, income loss due to the pandemic), contact with nature variables (Nature near home, Nature viewed from home windows, and being in nature on the preceding day), and well-being measures (positive affect, negative affect, vitality, happiness, and stress). Before completing the well-being questionnaire, participants took part in an experiment that tested the effect of viewing nature images or urban images on well-being measures. The results showed that nature near home and nature viewed from the windows contributed to higher levels of well-being, and that being in nature on the preceding day was associated with higher levels of positive affect. These benefits emerged even among those who had been economically harmed by the pandemic. Viewing nature images was also associated with level of well-being, mainly to reduced level of stress and negative affect. The current findings extend the understanding of the benefits of access to nature during stressful times, particularly during emergencies when accessing remote nature is impossible. Furthermore, the findings highlight the dual effect of contact with nature on well-being: enhancement of positive affect together with reduction of negative affect and stress. The findings indicate that exposure to nature is much more valuable for women than for men. These findings are highly important in view of gender differences in pandemic's impact on people's well-being.

Scholars argue that personal experience with climate change related impacts can increase public engagement, with mixed empirical evidence. Previous studies have almost exclusively focussed on individuals' experience with extreme weather events, even as scientific research on health impacts of climate change is burgeoning. This article extends previous research in the domain of public perceptions about climate-related public health impacts. Results from a nationally representative sample survey in New Zealand indicates that subjective attribution of infectious disease outbreaks to climate change and to human impact on the environment is positively associated with mitigation behavioural intentions and climate-focussed COVID-19 economic recovery policies. In contrast, knowledge about COVID-19 and self-reported economic impact due to COVID-19 is not associated with policy support. Moreover, significant interaction between political affiliation and subjective attribution to climate change on policy support indicate that learning about the links between health and climate change will particularly help increase mitigation engagement among right-leaning individuals. Subjective attribution may be the key to help translate personal experience to personal engagement.

In the United States, people of color from low income and working-class backgrounds are at disproportionate risk to pollution and other environmental stressors. These (EJCs) can also experience increased risk when a natural disaster collides with a preexisting environmental risk. The current research is an exploratory field study that examines perceptions of environmental risk after a natural disaster and how meaningful a public apology would be in three communities. Residents (=161) in two EJCs and a community without documented risks reported their environmental concerns and perceptions of public apologies. Overall, EJC residents reported greater concern about chemical hazard exposure than did residents with decreased risk. Furthermore, chemical exposure concerns facilitated public apology meaningfulness within the EJCs, but not in the decreased risk community.

We analysed some political consequences of household crowding during the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown across a wide quota sample of the Italian adult population, stratified as concerns gender, age, level of education, geographical area of residence, and size of area of residence, interviewed before (May-June 2019) and during (April 2020) the lockdown ( = 1,047, 51.2% women,  = 50.44,  = 14.36). Path analysis showed that household crowding during the lockdown was positively associated with support for anti-democratic political systems, through the partial mediation of the perceived relative impact of COVID-19 on one's family and of expectations of future lifestyle restrictions due to the pandemic. These associations did not depend on participants' pre-pandemic socio-economic status and predisposition to strong political leaders. Strengths, limitations, and possible developments of the study are discussed.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had severe negative effects on populations worldwide. The seriousness of the pandemic necessitated local and even national lockdowns. In Singapore a national lockdown with aStay-at-Home Order (SHO) lasted for over 7 weeks. The impact of the pandemic and of the long SHO period on neuropsychophysiological functioning remains unknown. Studies prior to the pandemic highlighted the beneficial role of nature exposure on mental health and well-being, although this has not yet been explored in the post-pandemic world. This is the first study to investigate the longitudinal changes in (1) brain frontal alpha asymmetry (FAA; neuroelectric marker of approach-related motivation), (2) depressive mood and (3) symptoms, and (4) emotional response to videos of various urban spaces from before COVID-19 to immediately after the SHO in Singapore was over. Finally, we examined whether higher vs lower exposure to nature during the SHO moderated changes over time.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected many aspects of people's lives. Lockdown measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have been more stringent for those aged over 70, at highest risk for the disease. Here, we examine whether home garden usage is associated with self-reported mental and physical wellbeing in older adults, during COVID-19 lockdown in Scotland. This study analysed data from 171 individuals (mean age 84 ± 0.5 years) from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 study who completed an online survey approximately two months after lockdown commenced (May/June, 2020), and reported having access to a home garden. The survey also included items on garden activities (gardening, relaxing), frequency of garden usage during lockdown, and measures of self-rated physical health, emotional and mental health, anxiety about COVID-19, and sleep quality. Ordinal regression models were adjusted for sex, living alone, education, occupational social class, anxiety and depressive symptoms, body mass index, and history of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Neither gardening nor relaxing in the garden were associated with health outcomes. However, higher frequency of garden usage during lockdown was associated with better self-rated physical health ( = 0.005), emotional and mental health ( = 0.04), sleep quality ( = 0.03), and a composite health score ( = 0.001), after adjusting for covariates. None of the garden measures were associated with perceived change in physical health, mental and emotional health, or sleep quality, from pre-lockdown levels. The results of the current study provide support for positive health benefits of spending time in a garden-though associations may be bidirectional-and suggest that domestic gardens could be a potential health resource during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Exposure to 'real' nature can increase positive affect and decrease negative affect, but direct access is not always possible, e.g. for people in health/care settings who often experience chronic boredom. In these settings 'virtual' forms of nature may also have mood-related benefits (e.g. reducing boredom) but it has been difficult to separate effects of nature content from those of delivery mode. The present laboratory-based study explored whether exposure to three different delivery modes of virtual nature could reduce negative affect (including boredom) and/or increase positive affect. Adult volunteer participants (n = 96) took part in a boredom induction task (to simulate the emotional state of many people in health/care settings) before being randomly assigned to view/interact with a virtual underwater coral reef in one of three experimental conditions: (a) 2D video viewed on a high-definition TV screen; (b) 360 video VR (360-VR) viewed via a head mounted display (HMD); or (c) interactive computer-generated VR (CG-VR), also viewed via a HMD and interacted with using a hand-held controller. Visual and auditory content was closely matched across conditions with help from the BBC's Blue Planet II series team. Supporting predictions, virtual exposure to a coral reef reduced boredom and negative affect and increased positive affect and nature connectedness. Although reductions in boredom and negative affect were similar across all three conditions, CG-VR was associated with significantly greater improvements in positive affect than TV, which were mediated by greater experienced presence and increases in nature connectedness. Results improve our understanding of the importance of virtual nature delivery mode and will inform studies in real care settings.