Designing Stress-Relieving Small Inner-City Park Environments for Teenagers
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Teenagers’ Need for Parks
1.2. Health-Promoting Small and Centrally Located Parks
2. Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Primary Outcome
2.3. Identification of Design Attributes and Levels
2.4. Scenarios and Choice Sets
2.5. Online Survey Design
2.6. Data Collection
2.7. Modelling Choice Data
3. Results
3.1. Parameter Values
3.2. Random Parameter
4. Discussion
Strengths and Limitations
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Garaigordobil, M.; Bernarás, E.; Jaureguizar, J.; Machimbarrena, J.M. Childhood depression: Relation to adaptive, clinical and predictor variables. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Goossens, L. Affect, emotion, and loneliness in adolescence. In Handbook of Adolescent Development; Psychology Press: London, UK, 2020; pp. 51–70. [Google Scholar]
- Viner, R.M.; Ross, D.; Hardy, R.; Kuh, D.; Power, C.; Johnson, A.; Wellings, K.; McCambridge, J.; Cole, T.J.; Kelly, Y.; et al. Life course epidemiology: Recognising the importance of adolescence. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2015, 69, 719–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- OECD/World Health Organization. Adolescent health. In Health at a Glance: Asia/Pacific 2020: Measuring Progress Towards Universal Health Coverage; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Kessler, R.C.; Angermeyer, M.; Anthony, J.C.; De Graaf, R.; Demyttenaere, K.; Gasquet, I.; De Girolamo, G.; Gluzman, S.; Gureje, O.; Haro, J.M.; et al. Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of mental disorders in the World Health Organization’s World Mental Health Survey Initiative. World Psychiatry 2007, 6, 168–176. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Reyes-Riveros, R.; Altamirano, A.; De La Barrera, F.; Rozas-Vásquez, D.; Vieli, L.; Meli, P. Linking public urban green spaces and human well-being: A systematic review. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 61, 127105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jabbar, M.; Yusoff, M.M.; Shafie, A. Assessing the role of urban green spaces for human well-being: A systematic review. GeoJournal 2022, 87, 4405–4423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, H.; Zhu, A.; Liu, L.; Zeng, Y.; Liu, R.; Ma, Z.; Liu, M.; Bi, J.; Ji, J.S. Assessing the effects of ultraviolet radiation, residential greenness and air pollution on vitamin D levels: A longitudinal cohort study in China. Environ. Int. 2022, 169, 107523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grahn, P.; Stoltz, J.; Skärbäck, E.; Bengtsson, A. Health-promoting nature-based paradigms in urban planning. Encyclopedia 2023, 3, 1419–1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nilsson, K.; Grahn, P. The scientific evidence for nature’s positive influence on human health and well-being. In Green and Healthy Nordic Cities: How to Plan, Design, and Manage Health-Promoting Urban Green Space; Borges, L.A., Rohrer, L., Nilsson, K., Eds.; Nordregio: Stockholm, Sweden, 2024; pp. 22–35. [Google Scholar]
- Ries, A.V.; Voorhees, C.C.; Roche, K.M.; Gittelsohn, J.; Yan, A.F.; Astone, N.M. A quantitative examination of park characteristics related to park use and physical activity among urban youth. J. Adolesc. Health 2009, 45, S64–S70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edwards, N.; Hooper, P.; Knuiman, M.; Foster, S.; Giles-Corti, B. Associations between park features and adolescent park use for physical activity. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2015, 12, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Hecke, L.; Verhoeven, H.; Clarys, P.; Van Dyck, D.; Van de Weghe, N.; Baert, T.; Deforche, B.; Van Cauwenberg, J. Factors related with public open space use among adolescents: A study using GPS and accelerometers. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2018, 17, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rivera, E.; Timperio, A.; Loh, V.H.; Deforche, B.; Veitch, J. Critical factors influencing adolescents’ active and social park use: A qualitative study using walk-along interviews. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 58, 126948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lloyd, K.; Burden, J.; Kiewa, J. Young Girls and Urban Parks: Planning for Transition through Adolescence. J. Park Recreat. Adm. 2008, 26, 21–38. [Google Scholar]
- Quagraine, V.K.; Oppong, R.A.; Baawone, F. A Quantitative Assessment of Relationship between Urban Green Parks and Self-Esteem of Urban Children and Adolescents (Teenage Group) in Ghana. Civ. Environ. Res. 2016, 8, 64–72. [Google Scholar]
- Feda, D.M.; Seelbinder, A.; Baek, S.; Raja, S.; Yin, L.; Roemmich, J.N. Neighbourhood parks and reduction in stress among adolescents: Results from Buffalo, New York. Indoor Built Environ. 2015, 24, 631–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akpinar, A. How is high school greenness related to students’ restoration and health ? Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 16, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baur, J. Campus community gardens and student health: A case study of a campus garden and student well-being. J. Am. Coll. Health 2022, 70, 377–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lyons, R.; Colbert, A.; Browning, M.; Jakub, K. Urban greenspace use among adolescents and young adults: An integrative review. Public Health Nurs. 2022, 39, 700–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fleckney, P. ‘A little escape dome’: Exploring how older adolescents experience urban parks as sites of mental wellbeing in Melbourne, Australia. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2023, 235, 104753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lieberg, M. Teenagers and public space. Commun. Res. 1995, 22, 720–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Childress, H. Landscapes of Betrayal, Landscapes of Joy: Curtisville in the Lives of Its Teenagers; SUNY Press: Albany, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Owens, P.E. No teens allowed: The exclusion of adolescents from public spaces. Landsc. J. 2002, 21, 156–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owens, P.E. Natural landscapes, gathering places, and prospect refuges: Characteristics of outdoor places valued by teens. Child. Environ. Q. 1988, 5, 17–24. [Google Scholar]
- Pretty, J.; Angus, C.; Bain, M.; Barton, J.; Gladwell, V.; Hine, R.; Pilgrim, S.; Sandercock, S.; Sellens, M. Nature, Childhood, Health and Life Pathways; Interdisciplinary Centre for Environment and Society (iCES), University of Essex: Colchester, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Saeidi-Rizi, F. Designing for Teen Open Space Needs: A Study of Adult and Teen Perceptions in Roanoke, Virginia; Virginia Tech: Blacksburg, VA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Owens, P.E. A place for adolescents: The power of research to inform the built environment. In Designing Cities with Children and Young People; Routledge: London, UK, 2017; pp. 65–78. [Google Scholar]
- Brunelle, S.; Brussoni, M.; Herrington, S.; Matsuba, M.K.; Pratt, M.W. Teens in public spaces and natural landscapes. Issues of Access and Design. In Handbook of Adolescent Development Research and Its Impact on Global Policy; Lansford, J.E., Banati, P., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2018; pp. 361–379. [Google Scholar]
- Duzenli, T.; Bayramoglu, E.; Ozbilen, A. Needs and preferences of adolescents in open urban spaces. Sci. Res. Essays 2010, 5, 201–216. [Google Scholar]
- Rivera, E.; Timperio, A.; Loh, V.H.; Deforche, B.; Veitch, J. Important park features for encouraging park visitation, physical activity and social interaction among adolescents: A conjoint analysis. Health Place 2021, 70, 102617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hegetschweiler, K.T.; Wartmann, F.M.; Dubernet, I.; Fischer, C.; Hunziker, M. Urban forest usage and perception of ecosystem services–A comparison between teenagers and adults. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 74, 127624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Hecke, L.; Ghekiere, A.; Van Cauwenberg, J.; Veitch, J.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Van Dyck, D.; Clarys, P.; Van De Weghe, N.; Deforche, B. Park characteristics preferred for adolescent park visitation and physical activity: A choice-based conjoint analysis using manipulated photographs. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2018, 178, 144–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnberger, A.; Eder, R.; Allex, B.; Wallner, P.; Weitensfelder, L.; Hutter, H.P. Urban green space preferences for various health-related psychological benefits of adolescent pupils, university students and adults. Urban For. Urban Green. 2024, 98, 128396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Veitch, J.; Salmon, J.; Deforche, B.; Ghekiere, A.; Van Cauwenberg, J.; Bangay, S.; Timperio, A. Park attributes that encourage park visitation among adolescents: A conjoint analysis. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 161, 52–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costa, M.S.; Almeida, D.Q.; Silva, J.P.; Barros, H.; Ribeiro, A.I.; Leão, T. Imagine your perfect park: A qualitative study on adolescents’ usage of green spaces, perceived benefits and preferences. Cities Health 2024, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mertens, L.; Van Cauwenberg, J.; Veitch, J.; Deforche, B.; Van Dyck, D. Differences in park characteristic preferences for visitation and physical activity among adolescents: A latent class analysis. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, D.; Bo, M.; Zhou, Y. How do the young perceive urban parks? A study on young adults’ landscape preferences and health benefits in urban parks based on the landscape perception model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rigolon, A.; Németh, J. A Quality Index of Parks for Youth (QUINPY): Evaluating urban parks through geographic information systems. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2018, 45, 275–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayala-Azcárraga, C.; Diaz, D.; Zambrano, L. Characteristics of urban parks and their relation to user well-being. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2019, 189, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labib, S.M.; Lindley, S.; Huck, J.J. Spatial dimensions of the influence of urban green-blue spaces on human health: A systematic review. Environ. Res. 2020, 180, 108869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evensen, K.H.; Hemsett, G.; Nordh, H. Developing a place-sensitive tool for park-safety management experiences from green-space managers and female park users in Oslo. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 60, 127057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ståhle, A. More green space in a denser city: Critical relations between user experience and urban form. Urban Des. Int. 2010, 15, 47–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haaland, C.; Konijnendijk van den Bosch, C. Challenges and strategies for urban green-space planning in cities undergoing densification: A review. Urban For. Urban Green. 2015, 14, 760–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tappert, S.; Kloti, T.; Drilling, M. Contested urban green spaces in the compact city: The (re-)negotiation of urban gardening in Swiss cities. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2018, 170, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, T.C. Urban parks: Satisfaction evaluation model of city infrastructure service. Manag. Rev. 2019, 38, 109–125. [Google Scholar]
- Addas, A. The importance of urban green spaces in the development of smart cities. Front. Environ. Sci. 2023, 11, 1206372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nordh, H. Restorative Components of Small Urban Parks; Norwegian University of Life Sciences: Ås, Norway, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Francis, M. Urban Open Space: Designing for User Needs; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Csomós, G.; Farkas, J.Z.; Szabó, B.; Bertus, Z.; Kovács, Z. Exploring the use and perceptions of inner-city small urban parks: A case study of Budapest, Hungary. Urban For. Urban Green. 2023, 86, 128003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Nordin, N.A.; Md Dali, M. Does small mean unimportant? A review of pocket park values and associated factors. Open House Int. 2024. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, S. Parks for the future–A psychologist view. In Parks for the Future; Sorte, G.J., Ed.; Movium: Alnarp, Sweden, 1990; pp. 4–22. [Google Scholar]
- Ulrich, R.S. Effects of gardens on health outcomes: Theory and research. In Healing Gardens; Marcus, C.C., Barnes, M., Eds.; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1999; pp. 27–86. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, P.; Han, L.; Hao, R.; Mei, R. Understanding the relationship be-tween small urban parks and mental health: A case study in Shanghai, China. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 78, 127784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nordh, H.; Hartig, T.; Hagerhall, C.M.; Fry, G. Components of small urban parks that predict the possibility for restoration. Urban For. Urban Green. 2009, 8, 225–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tweed, C.; Sutherland, M. Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 83, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, M.; Smith, N.; Craven, O. The impacts of public art on cities, places and people’s lives. J. Arts Manag. Law Soc. 2021, 52, 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, X.; Van Damme, S.; Uyttenhove, P. A review of empirical studies of cultural ecosystem services in urban green infrastructure. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 293, 112895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spennemann, D.H. The Nexus between Cultural Heritage Management and the Mental Health of Urban Communities. Land 2022, 11, 304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Qiu, L.; Gao, T. Application of the eight perceived sensory dimensions as a tool for urban green space assessment and planning in China. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 40, 224–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skärbäck, E.; Grahn, P. People’s preferences for outdoor affordances are relatively similar irrespective of cultural background. In Bridging the Gap; Bauer, P., Collender, M., Jakob, M., Ketterer Bonnelame, L., Petschek, P., Siegrist, D., Tschumi, C., Eds.; ECLAS, Institute for Landscape and Open Space, HSR Hochschule für Technik: Rapperswil, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 367–370. [Google Scholar]
- Bai, X.; Li, X.; Yan, D. The Perceived Restorativeness of Outdoor Spatial Characteristics for High School Adolescents: A Case Study from China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, X.; Astell-Burt, T.; Standl, M.; Flexeder, C.; Heinrich, J.; Markevych, I. Green space quality and adolescent mental health: Do personality traits matter? Environ. Res. 2022, 206, 112591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, T.; Yu, P.; Wen, B.; Yang, Z.; Huang, W.; Guo, Y.; Abramson, M.J.; Li, S. Greenspace and health outcomes in children and adolescents: A systematic review. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 314, 120193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stigsdotter, U.K.; Corazon, S.S.; Sidenius, U.; Kristiansen, J.; Grahn, P. It is not all bad for the grey city—A crossover study on physiological and psychological restoration in a forest and an urban environment. Health Place 2017, 46, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deng, L.; Li, X.; Luo, H.; Fu, E.K.; Ma, J.; Sun, L.X.; Huang, Z.; Cai, S.Z.; Jia, Y. Empirical study of landscape types, landscape elements and landscape components of the urban park promoting physiological and psychological restoration. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 48, 126488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wales, M.; Mårtensson, F.; Hoff, E.; Jansson, M. Elevating the Role of the Outdoor Environment for Adolescent Wellbeing in Everyday Life. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 774592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Oijstaeijen, W.; Van Passel, S.; Back, P.; Cools, J. The politics of green infrastructure: A discrete choice experiment with Flemish local decision-makers. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 199, 107493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nordh, H.; Alalouch, C.; Hartig, T. Assessing restorative components of small urban parks using conjoint methodology. Urban For. Urban Green. 2011, 10, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mattila, O.; Korhonen, A.; Pöyry, E.; Hauru, K.; Holopainen, J.; Parvinen, P. Restoration in a virtual reality forest environment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 107, 106295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mangham, L.J.; Hanson, K.; McPake, B. How to do (or not to do)… Designing a discrete choice experiment for application in a low-income country. Health Policy Plan. 2009, 24, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campagnaro, T.; Vecchiato, D.; Arnberger, A.; Celegato, R.; Da Re, R.; Rizzetto, R.; Semenzato, P.; Sitzia, T.; Tempesta, T.; Cattaneo, D. General, stress relief and perceived safety preferences for green spaces in the historic city of Padua (Italy). Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 52, 126695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ebenberger, M.; Arnberger, A. Exploring visual preferences for structural attributes of urban forest stands for restoration and heat relief. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 41, 272–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shayestefar, M.; Pazhouhanfar, M.; van Oel, C.; Grahn, P. Exploring the Influence of the Visual Attributes of Kaplan’s Preference Matrix in the Assessment of Urban Parks: A Discrete Choice Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butler, A.M.; Burcu, M.; Christian, J.B.; Tian, F.; Andersen, K.M.; Blumentals, W.A.; Maddox, K.E.J.; Alexander, G.C. Noninterventional studies in the COVID-19 era: Methodological considerations for study design and analysis. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2023, 153, 91–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Medical Association. The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association, Declaration of Helsinki. 2013. Available online: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ (accessed on 2 May 2024).
- Twedt, E.; Rainey, R.M.; Proffitt, D.R. Beyond nature: The roles of visual appeal and individual differences in perceived restorative potential. J. Environ. Psychol. 2019, 65, 101322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajibeigi, P.; Pazhouhanfar, M.; Grahn, P.; Nazif, H. Enhancing Citizens’ Perceived Restoration Potential of Green Facades through Specific Architectural Attributes. Buildings 2023, 13, 2356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bengtsson, A.; Åshage, A.; Andersson, M.; Dybkjaer, E.; Grahn, P. Improving green space design based on health design theory and environmental psychology. In Green and Healthy Nordic Cities: How to Plan, Design, and Manage Health-Promoting Urban Green Space; Borges, L.A., Rohrer, L., Nilsson, K., Eds.; Nordregio: Stockholm, Sweden, 2024; pp. 79–105. [Google Scholar]
- Stoltz, J.; Grahn, P. Perceived sensory dimensions: An evidence-based approach to greenspace aesthetics. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 59, 126989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiu, L.; Nielsen, A.B. Are perceived sensory dimensions a reliable tool for urban green space assessment and planning? Landsc. Res. 2015, 40, 834–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- An, C.; Liu, J.; Liu, Q.; Liu, Y.; Fan, X.; Hu, Y. How Perceived Sensory Dimensions of Forest Park Are Associated with Stress Restoration in Beijing? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, S.; Li, A. Identify the significant landscape characteristics for the perceived restorativeness of 8 perceived sensory dimensions in urban green space. Heliyon 2024, 10, e27925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mengyun, C.H.E.N.; Guangsi, L.I.N. How perceived sensory dimensions of urban green spaces affect cultural ecosystem benefits: A study on Haizhu Wetland Park, China. Urban For. Urban Green. 2023, 86, 127983. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X.; Lin, E.S.; Tan, P.Y.; Qi, J.; Waykool, R. Assessment of visual landscape quality of urban green spaces using image-based metrics derived from perceived sensory dimensions. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2023, 102, 107200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stoltz, J.; Grahn, P. Perceived sensory dimensions: Key aesthetic qualities for health-promoting urban green spaces. J. Biomed. Res. 2021, 2, 22–29. [Google Scholar]
- Grahn, P.; Stigsdotter, U.K. The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban green space and stress restoration. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 94, 264–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stigsdotter, U.K.; Sidenius, U.; Grahn, P. From research to practice: Operationalisation of the eight perceived sensory dimensions into a health-promoting design tool. Alam Cipta 2020, 13, 57–70. [Google Scholar]
- Ismael, K.S.; Mohammed, N.H.; Rasul, H.Q. Potentialities in Creating the Pedestrian Malls in the Historical City Centers: A Study Case of Mawlawi Street, Sulaimani, Iraqi Kurdistan. Kurd. J. Appl. Res. 2019, 4, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huai, S.; Chen, F.; Liu, S.; Canters, F.; Van de Voorde, T. Using social media photos and computer vision to assess cultural ecosystem services and landscape features in urban parks. Ecosyst. Serv. 2022, 57, 101475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, W.; Lu, S.; Guo, Y. Measuring the perceived heterogeneity of cultural ecosystem services in national cultural parks: Evidence from China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peschardt, K.K.; Stigsdotter, U.K. Associations between park characteristics and perceived restorativeness of small public urban green spaces. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 112, 26–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Q.; Lee, C.; Lu, Z.; Yuan, X. Interactions with artificial water features: A scoping review of health-related outcomes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 215, 104191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, J.; Ramanpong, J.; Chang, J.; Wu, C.-D.; Chao, P.-H.; Yu, C.-P. Effects of blue space exposure in urban and natural environments on psychological and physiological responses: A within-subject experiment. Urban For. Urban Green. 2023, 87, 128066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pals, R.; Steg, L.; Dontje, J.; Siero, F.W.; van der Zee, K.I. Physical features, coherence and positive outcomes of person-environment interactions: A virtual reality study. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 40, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdulkarim, D.; Nasar, J.L. Are livable elements also restorative? J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 38, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, D.; Yoon, J.-Y. A Study on the Behavioral Characteristics of the Users and Preferences of the Bench and Pergolas in Busan Citizens’ Parks. J. Korea Contents Assoc. 2018, 18, 658–670. [Google Scholar]
- Rout, A.; Galpern, P. Benches, fountains and trees: Using mixed-methods with questionnaire and smartphone data to design urban green spaces. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 67, 127335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akpinar, A. Factors influencing the use of urban greenways: A case study of Aydın, Turkey. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 16, 123–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosso, F.; Cappa, F.; Spitzmiller, R.; Ferrero, M. Pocket parks towards more sustainable cities. Architectural, environmental, managerial and legal considerations towards an integrated framework: A case study in the Mediterranean region. Environ. Chall. 2022, 7, 100402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Zhang, Z.; Jing, F.; Gao, J.; Ma, J.; Shao, G.; Noel, S. An evaluation of urban green space in Shanghai, China, using eye tracking. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 56, 126903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amati, M.; Sita, J.; Parmehr, E.; Mccarthy, C.; Sita, J.; Parmehr, E.; Mccarthy, C. How eye-catching are natural features when walking through a park? Eye-tracking responses to videos of walks. Urban For. Urban Green. 2018, 31, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manyani, A.; Shackleton, C.M.; Cocks, M.L. Attitudes and preferences towards elements of formal and informal public green spaces in two South African towns. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Packer, J.; Bond, N. Museums as Restorative Environments. Curator. Mus. 2010, 53, 421–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarek, S. Health Promoting Qualities Framework for Blue and Green Landscapes: Applying Perceived Restorativeness on a Case Study of Nile Riverfront in Greater Cairo Region. J. Eng. Res. 2022, 6, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saeedi, I.; Dabbagh, E. Modeling the relationships between hardscape color and user satisfaction in urban parks. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 6535–6552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, K.G.; Chien, H. The influences of landscape features on visitation of hospital green spaces—A choice experiment approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McFadden, D.; Train, K. Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J. Appl. Econ. 2000, 15, 447–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Train, K.E. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hensher, D.A.; Greene, W.H. The Mixed Logit Model: The State of Practice and Warnings for the Unwary; Institute of Transport Studies, the University of Sydney and Monash University: Sydney, Australia, 2002; Volume 1, pp. 1–39. [Google Scholar]
- Train, K.; Sonnier, G. Mixed Logit with Bounded Distributions of Correlated Partworths. In Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; pp. 117–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haghani, M.; ShahHoseini, Z. Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering and e Review of Statistics and Probabilities; Ava Book: Tehran, Iran, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Höfler, M.; Pfister, H.; Lieb, R.; Wittchen, H.U. The use of weights to account for non-response and drop-out. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2005, 40, 291–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Memari, S.; Pazhouhanfar, M.; Grahn, P. Perceived sensory dimensions of green areas: An experimental study on stress recovery. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hentschel, U.; Kiessling, M.; Hosemann, A. Adaptation to boredom and stress. Adv. Psychol. 2004, 136, 303–323. [Google Scholar]
- Staats, H.; Collado, S.; Sorrel, M.A. Understimulation resembles overstimulation. J. Environ. Psychol. 2024, 95, 102280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khansari, M.; Moghtader, M.R.; Yavari, M. The Persian Garden: Echoes of Paradise; Mage Publishers: Washington, DC, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, L.; Dong, Q.; Luo, S.; Jiang, W.; Hao, M.; Chen, Q. Effects of spatial elements of urban landscape forests on the restoration potential and preference of adolescents. Land 2021, 10, 1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, K.; Huang, W.; Lin, G. Bridging landscape preference and landscape design: A study on the preference and optimal combination of landscape elements based on conjoint analysis. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 73, 127615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caymaz, G.F.Y.; Şimşek, E. Investigating the Relationship between Water Element Designs and User Preferences. Str. Art Urban Creat. Sci. J. 2022, 8, 90. [Google Scholar]
- Coss, R.G. All that glistens: Water connotations in surface finishes. Ecol. Psychol. 1990, 2, 367–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coss, R.G.; Ruff, S.; Simms, T. All that glistens: II. The effects of reflective surface finishes on the mouthing activity of infants and toddlers. Ecol. Psychol. 2003, 15, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subiza-Pérez, M.; Vozmediano, L.; San Juan, C. Green and blue settings as providers of mental health ecosystem services: Comparing urban beaches and parks and building a predictive model of psychological restoration. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2020, 204, 103926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, S.; Chen, Y.; Mu, S.; Jiang, B.; Lin, Y.; Gao, T.; Qiu, L. The psychological restorative effects of campus environments on college students in the context of the covid-19 pandemic: A case study at Northwest A&F University, Shaanxi, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, M.; Smith, A.; Humphryes, K.; Pahl, S.; Snelling, D.; Depledge, M. Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 482–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davoudian, N. Urban Lighting for People: Evidence-Based Lighting Design for the Built Environment; Routledge: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Ünver, A. People’s Experience of Urban Lighting in Public Space; Middle East Technical University: Ankara, Turkey, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, B.; Hallo, J. Informing good lighting in parks through visitors’ perceptions and experiences. Int. J. Sustain. Light. 2019, 21, 47–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trop, T.; Shoshany Tavory, S.; Portnov, B.A. Factors affecting pedestrians’ perceptions of safety, comfort, and pleasantness induced by public space lighting: A systematic literature review. Environ. Behav. 2023, 55, 3–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manta, S.W.; Lopes, A.A.D.S.; Hino, A.A.F.; Benedetti, T.R.B.; Rech, C.R. Open public spaces and physical activity facilities: Study of systematic observation of the environment. Rev. Bras. Cineantropometria Desempenho Hum. 2018, 20, 445–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whyte, W.H. City: Rediscovering the Center; University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Whyte, W.H. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces; The Conservation Foundation: Washington, DC, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Elsheshtawy, Y. Observing the public realm: William Whyte’s the social life of small urban spaces. Built Environ. 2015, 41, 399–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, Y.; Zou, Z.; He, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Luo, S. Beyond Blue and Green Spaces: Identifying and Characterizing Restorative Environments on Sichuan Technology and Business University Campus. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grahn, P. Den fysiska miljöns diktatur över människan. Nord. J. Archit. Res. 1989, 2, 15–232. [Google Scholar]
- Stigsdotter, U.; Grahn, P. What makes a garden a healing garden. J. Ther. Hortic. 2002, 13, 60–69. [Google Scholar]
- Van Vliet, E.; Dane, G.; Weijs-Perrée, M.; Van Leeuwen, E.; Van Dinter, M.; Van Den Berg, P.; Borgers, A.; Chamilothori, K. The influence of urban park attributes on user preferences: Evaluation of virtual parks in an online stated-choice experiment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schweiker, M.; Ampatzi, E.; Andargie, M.S.; Andersen, R.K.; Azar, E.; Barthelmes, V.M.; Berger, C.; Bourikas, L.; Carlucci, S.; Chinazzo, G. Review of multi-domain approaches to indoor environmental perception and behaviour. Build. Environ. 2020, 176, 106804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Dai, X.; Wu, J.; Wu, X.; Nie, X. Influence of urban green open space on residents’ physical activity in China. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berchi, C.; Launoy, G. Principe, intérêts et limites de la méthode des choix discrets pour la révélation des préférences en santé. Rev. D’épidémiologie Santé Publique 2007, 55, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gyllin, M.; Grahn, P. Semantic assessments of experienced biodiversity from photographs and on-site observations-a comparison. Environ. Nat. Resour. Res. 2015, 5, 46–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gandy, R.; Meitner, M.J. The effects of an advanced traveler information system on scenic beauty ratings and the enjoyment of a recreational drive. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 82, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Attributes | Levels | Description | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Water features | Pond Garden stream Fountain | |||
Seating | Wooden Concrete Metal | |||
Arch | Square arch Crescent arch Not present | |||
Pavement | Paving stone Natural flagstone Paving stone–grass | |||
Lighting pole | High-base Medium Short-base | |||
Sculpture | Present Not present | |||
Fence | Wooden Concrete Metal | |||
Raised planting bed | Present Not present |
Alt | Water Features | Bench | Lighting Pole | Pavement | Raised Planting Bed | Fence | Sculpture | Arch |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
alt 1 | fountain | wooden | high-base | paving stone | present | metal | present | crescent arch |
alt 2 | garden stream | metal | medium-base | concrete–grass | present | wooden | not present | not present |
Characteristics | Number (N = 265) | |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 90 | |
Female | 175 | |
Age (years) | ||
13–15 | 215 | |
16–19 | 50 | |
Education | ||
Primary | 131 | |
High school | 112 | |
Diploma | 22 | |
Distance to the nearest city park | 300 m 300 m–1 km 1–5 km >5 km | 73 110 53 29 |
How to get to the park | Walking | 151 |
Bicycle | 31 | |
Private vehicles | 79 | |
Public transportation | 4 | |
Number of visits to the park during the warm months | Never | 60 |
A few times during the season | 99 | |
At least once a month | 55 | |
At least once a week | 33 | |
A few times a week | 18 | |
Duration of rest in the park | 30 min | 81 |
30 min to 1 h | 93 | |
1 to 2 h | 60 | |
2 to 3 h | 19 | |
More than 3 h | 12 | |
Effect of the park in creating motivation for walking, ball sports and use of sports equipment | Poor (0) | 16 |
(1) | 12 | |
(2) | 11 | |
Moderate (3) | 35 | |
(4) | 33 | |
(5) | 46 | |
Excellent (6) | 112 | |
Effect of the park in reducing obesity and weight loss | Poor (0) | 14 |
(1) | 6 | |
(2) | 15 | |
Moderate (3) | 68 | |
(4) | 37 | |
(5) | 44 | |
Excellent (6) | 81 | |
How important is it for you to rest, clear your mind and reduce your stress when visiting a small city park? | Poor (0) | 9 |
(1) | 9 | |
(2) | 7 | |
Moderate (3) | 61 | |
(4) | 24 | |
(5) | 48 | |
Excellent (6) | 107 | |
Based on your experience, how much does spending time in a small city park help you to have peace of mind, clear your mind and reduce stress? | Poor (0) | 10 |
(1) | 11 | |
(2) | 13 | |
Moderate (3) | 52 | |
(4) | 39 | |
(5) | 49 | |
Excellent (6) | 91 |
Attributes and Levels | Interaction Effects | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Random Parameters | Base Level | Value | Std err | t-Test | p-Value | Age | Gender | Education | ||||
ASC_1 | β0 | 0.0816 | 0.022 | 3.71 | 0.000208 | |||||||
Arch | ||||||||||||
Square arch (mean) | β1 | −0.269 | 0.0409 | −6.57 | 5.06 × 10−11 | - | - | - | ||||
Square arch (St.dev) | 0.229 | 0.0486 | 4.71 | 2.45 × 10−6 | ||||||||
Not present (mean) | β2 | −0.269 | 0.0537 | −5.02 | 5.16 × 10−7 | - | - | - | ||||
Not present (st.dev) | 0.603 | 0.058 | 10.4 | 0 | ||||||||
Lighting pole | ||||||||||||
High base (mean) | β5 | 0.314 | 0.0419 | 7.51 | 5.88 × 10−14 | - | - | - | ||||
High base (st.dev) | −0.267 | 0.0497 | −5.38 | 7.29 × 10−8 | ||||||||
Pavement | ||||||||||||
Paving stone–grass (mean) | β8 | 0.169 | 0.0398 | 4.24 | 2.25 × 10−5 | 0.00528 | - | - | ||||
Paving stone–grass (st.dev) | −0.206 | 0.0564 | −3.65 | 0.000265 | ||||||||
Sculpture | ||||||||||||
Not present (mean) | β11 | 0.222 | 0.0437 | 5.09 | 3.62 × 10−7 | - | 0.0558 | - | ||||
Not present (st.dev) | 0.492 | 0.0519 | 9.49 | 0 | ||||||||
Water features | ||||||||||||
Garden stream (mean) | β12 | 0.490 | 0.0543 | 9.03 | 0 | 0.00124 | 0.015 | - | ||||
Garden stream (st.dev) | −0.599 | 0.0716 | −8.37 | 0 | ||||||||
Pond (mean) | β13 | −0.13 | 0.0391 | −3.31 | 0.000936 | 0.0356 | - | - | ||||
Pond (st.dev) | 0.124 | 0.051 | 2.43 | 0.0151 | ||||||||
Non-Random Parameters | ||||||||||||
Fence | ||||||||||||
Wooden (mean) | β3 | −0.152 | 0.0385 | −3.94 | 8.14 × 10−5 | 0.0646 | - | - | ||||
Wooden (st.dev) | 0.0372 | 0.0498 | 0.747 | 0.455 | ||||||||
Metal (mean) | β4 | −0.0774 | 0.0388 | −1.99 | 0.0463 | - | - | - | ||||
Metal (st.dev) | −0.037 | 0.0471 | −0.785 | 0.433 | ||||||||
Pavement | ||||||||||||
Natural flagstone (mean) | β7 | 0.109 | 0.0383 | 2.84 | 0.00451 | - | - | - | ||||
Natural flagstone (st.dev) | −0.0815 | 0.0494 | −1.65 | 0.0993 | ||||||||
Bench | ||||||||||||
Metal (mean) | β10 | 0.0785 | 0.0399 | 1.97 | 0.0493 | - | - | - | ||||
Metal (st.dev) | −0.0614 | 0.0507 | −1.21 | 0.226 | ||||||||
Non-Effect Parameters | ||||||||||||
Lighting | ||||||||||||
Short base (mean) | β6 | −0.0554 | 0.0393 | −1.41 | 0.158 | 0.0208 | - | - | ||||
Short base (st.dev) | 0.0774 | 0.0526 | 1.47 | 0.141 | ||||||||
Bench | ||||||||||||
Concrete (mean) | β9 | 0.0372 | 0.0386 | 0.964 | 0.335 | 0.0045 | - | - | ||||
Concrete (st.dev) | −0.0198 | 0.0505 | −0.392 | 0.695 | ||||||||
Raised planting bed | ||||||||||||
Not present (mean) | β14 | −0.014 | 0.0321 | −0.437 | 0.662 | - | - | - | ||||
Not present (st.dev) | 0.146 | 0.0389 | 3.74 | 0.000181 | ||||||||
Goodness of Fit Measure | ||||||||||||
ρ02 = 0.0844 | LL(0) = −6741.938 | LL(ß) = −6173.069 | LL(R) = 1137.738 | |||||||||
ρ02 | ρ02 | Χ292 (0.95) = 42.557 | LL(R) Χ152 (0.95) |
Utility Ranking | Description | Attributes |
---|---|---|
High utility | The attribute that has the greatest impact on adolescent recovery in an urban park environment. | Garden stream |
Moderate utility | The attributes that have a moderate impact on adolescent recovery in an urban park environment. | Light pole high-base Crescent arch No sculpture Paving stone–grass Concrete fence Fountain |
Low utility | The attributes that have a low impact on adolescent recovery in an urban park environment. | Natural flagstone Metal bench Raised planting bed |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nosrati, A.; Pazhouhanfar, M.; Chen, C.; Grahn, P. Designing Stress-Relieving Small Inner-City Park Environments for Teenagers. Land 2024, 13, 1633. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101633
Nosrati A, Pazhouhanfar M, Chen C, Grahn P. Designing Stress-Relieving Small Inner-City Park Environments for Teenagers. Land. 2024; 13(10):1633. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101633
Chicago/Turabian StyleNosrati, Aida, Mahdieh Pazhouhanfar, Chongxian Chen, and Patrik Grahn. 2024. "Designing Stress-Relieving Small Inner-City Park Environments for Teenagers" Land 13, no. 10: 1633. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101633
APA StyleNosrati, A., Pazhouhanfar, M., Chen, C., & Grahn, P. (2024). Designing Stress-Relieving Small Inner-City Park Environments for Teenagers. Land, 13(10), 1633. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101633