IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v21y2024i5p598-d1389257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Low-Level Visual Features of Window Views Contribute to Perceived Naturalness and Mental Health Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Larissa Samaan

    (Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Leonie Klock

    (Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Sandra Weber

    (Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Mirjam Reidick

    (Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Leonie Ascone

    (Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Simone Kühn

    (Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
    Lise Meitner Group for Environmental Neuroscience, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, 14195 Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that natural window views are beneficial for mental health, but it is still unclear which specific features constitute a ‘natural’ window view. On the other hand, studies on image analysis found that low-level visual features (LLVFs) are associated with perceived naturalness, but mainly conducted experiments with brief stimulus presentations. In this study, research on the effects of window views on mental health was combined with the detailed analysis of LLVFs. Healthy adults rated window views from their home and sent in photographs of those views for analysis. Content validity of the ‘ecological’ view assessment was evaluated by checking correlations of LLVFs with window view ratings. Afterwards, it was explored which of the LLVFs best explained variance in perceived percentage of nature and man-made elements, and in ratings of view quality. Criterion validity was tested by investigating which variables were associated with negative affect and impulsive decision-making. The objective and subjective assessments of nature/sky in the view were aligned but objective brightness was unreliable. The perceived percentage of nature was significantly explained by green pixel ratio, while view quality was associated with fractals, saturation, sky pixel ratio and straight edge density. The higher subjective brightness of rooms was associated with a lower negative affect, whereas results for impulsive decision-making were inconsistent. The research highlights the validity to apply LLVFs analysis to ecological window views. For affect, subjective brightness seemed to be more relevant than LLVFs. For impulsive decision-making, performance context needs to be controlled in future studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Larissa Samaan & Leonie Klock & Sandra Weber & Mirjam Reidick & Leonie Ascone & Simone Kühn, 2024. "Low-Level Visual Features of Window Views Contribute to Perceived Naturalness and Mental Health Outcomes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(5), pages 1-35, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:5:p:598-:d:1389257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/5/598/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/5/598/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:5:p:598-:d:1389257. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.