八塊--[Oral]Restorative Benefits of Natural Greenness: A Meta-Analysis on Attention Restorative Theory

Using a meta-analysis, existing research comparing the effects of different environmental settings on perceived restorativeness was synthesized. Focusing on the general framework of restorative environments, this study quantitatively reviewed the correlation between 4 factors—being away, fascination, extent, and compatibility—of attention restoration theory. The ongoing literature search located 10 articles covering 2,070 participants and 118 scenes. Data suitable for a qualitative review were found in 6 of the articles, covering a total of 1,409 participants and 83 scenes. A considerable degree of heterogenecity existed in the data for all environments, indicating that results have not been reproducible. The quantitative data from the collected studies were also transformed into effect size (ES). In addition, 15 studied variables (e.g., researchers’ backgrounds, participants’ backgrounds, research design details, measuring tools, titles of published journal) were selected and analyzed using one-way ANOVA to relate ESs. The primary findings of this study suggested that different measuring scales produced different sizes of results; moreover, natural-based landscape was more effective than built landscape in regards to restorative benefits (mean ES of 1.84). As this study remains unfinished and article collection is an ongoing process, more implications for efficiently planning future work will also be discussed.

瑋佳-進度報告和後續計畫-1

　　　
<首次嘗試使用連結以利說明, 請大家點點看再告訴我看不看得懂>
　　　

一、本學期進度( ~2009.1.31)

(一)投稿 J. Therapeutic Horticulture (AHTA)

就是去年受訓時上課不專心的小研究, 經撰寫成文後, 老師提供全文修改意見, 並建議加1個設計案後投稿AHTA的期刊http://www.ahta.org/research/journal.cfm, 因為他們有接受設計案的投稿, 也就是期刊中的Therapeutic Landscape and Garden Design分類(一般學術研究論文應是投Research分類).

預定採case study的撰寫方式, 主要內容包括: a.理論架構的建立; b.案例分析與論證; c.理論對應與設計原則擬定; d.設計成果(造園館1樓)

由於整篇文章已撰就, 僅須增修部分內容, 預計學期結束前可完成; 目前進度如下:

1. Abstract http://papayasu.blogspot.com/2008/12/exploration-and-application-of-natural.html

2. Introduction (包含文獻回顧, 研究目的) http://papayasu.blogspot.com/2008/12/benefit-and-application-of-natural.html

3. The theoretical framework of the benefit of natural views http://papayasu.blogspot.com/2008/12/benefit-and-application-of-natural_17.html

4. Case study: an empirical investigation and analysis (尚未改寫原本的研究方法與研究結果)

5. Design principles (尚未改寫原研究結論)

6. Designing a classroom (尚未完成設計, 預計邀請具建築設計背景者擔任作者之一, 負責教室的再設計)

　　　　

關於注意力恢復的在工作上效益

    上次看景觀效益報告芝田征司"EFFECTS OF THE FOLIAGE PLANT ON TASK PERFORMANCE AND MOOD"之後，就思考一些關於自然因子對工作效益的實驗，芝田征司的實驗是請受測者到有布置觀葉植物的房間內，進行聯想性或分類性的工作。結果植物對工作的影響，實驗結果不是很明顯。他文章討論也有提到可能時間要夠長影響才會出現。所以後來我又想到那時候景效一開始那篇CIMPRICH   "VIEWS TO NATURE: EFEECTS ON ATTENTION" 實驗內容是學校宿舍以窗景差異來看學生注意力和表現的影響等等。

    後來我自己覺得其實我現在居住的太子長興BOT宿舍，是個非常適合實驗的場所。宿舍是兩棟ㄇ字型的建築，基本上單人房就只有兩種房型面向101，或面向別人的窗戶。雙人房也是兩種房型，面向蟾蜍山或別人的窗戶。而且大家的家具擺放應該九成相同（因為線路的關係）由於附近樓層比我們高的建築物都沒有距離，所以基本大概六樓以上的人景致（看到遠景）都很類似 (窗戶大約1.5MX2.5M那麼大 不過可以開窗的只有三分之一)。除了窗景差別，我覺得也可以做觀葉植物的影響，因為我本人放人很多植物在房間裡面，也常推薦別人擺放，通常我跟他們說，新蓋的房子甲醛很高，所以可以放一些植物吸甲醛他們就都很有意願。這樣一來就有可能拉長研究時間，譬如在書桌附近擺放觀葉植物，請同學每天簡錄在書桌前所做的事情，譬如念書一個小時之類的，不知道有沒有可能找到這些自然因子的影響

因為台大這個新宿舍大約有一千位住戶，很多控制因子都相似，其實還蠻有可能發展很多有趣的實驗~而且有單人房的宿舍非常少見~ 如果有送一些東西，找到受測者應該不難～

八塊-專討摘要

Percieved restorativeness and place attachment:(How) are they related?（ <---跟瑋佳學姐一樣深愛這個句型）

Researchers of environmental psychology have often suggested that people gain benefits from perception of natural environments, most studies have focused up either ART or people's involvement to settings such as place attachment theory. This study try to fill the gap in the literature between them by investigating the experiences of both on-site and experimental samples that shaping their cognition of the settings. This study investigated 3 different natural settings, 231 experimental and 675 on-site samples were collected. To examine the consistence of the result, participants also asked to rate their perceived level of naturalness and preference of the setting. In this study the author also tried to test the mediating role of place attachment in environmental restorative potential. The results indicate that legibility holds lower inner consistency in experimental samples, both samples recognize the more natural environments as more attached and higher percieved retorativeness. Mediating role of place attachment will be further disscussed. Together, these results help substantiate the restorative function of people’s environmental perception.

Restorative Component Measures

After Kaplan & Kaplan (1983) proposed restorative environment theory, the researchers have developed varies measures for the four components of restorative environments. In 1991, Hartig and colleagues published the Perceived Restorativeness Scale (PRS). The PRS used coherence to replace extent item. Later, Hartig continually conducted a series of studies in order to develop the PRS. Overall, these studies yielded a two-factors model result: a General Restorativeness Factor（includes being away, fascination, and compatibility）and a Coherence Factor. Korpela et al. (1996、2001) after found a similar factor structure with favorite and unpleasant places. Korpela suggested that further improvements using alternative item combinations and analytic strategies should be needed to refine the PRS.
Laumann et al. subsequently developed of a measure of the five restorative components with 22 items in 2001. Laumann split Being Away items into two factors: a physical being away, novelty (e.g., I am in a different place than usual) and a psychological being away, escape (e.g., I am away from my daily obligations). This empirical finding is in keeping with Kaplan and Kaplan’s original definitions of Being Away referring to either physical or psychological aspects.
However, it is interesting that since Laumann’s RCS provide a reliable measure of the 4 restorative components of nature and city environments, why the scale is not popularly used? There are so many measure tools to measure the restorative environments, how do we choose the scale to apply in our studies?
Additionally, about the translation problems, I think that Lanumann made a good example. The RCS questionnaires were first translated from Norwegian into English by one individual, then translated back by another individual. Maybe we can employ this approach to modify our Chinese questionnaires. Thus, we can diminish a misunderstanding between the English and Chinese translations.

A new measurement tool?

Most of the research that tries to measure respodents' attentional restorative effect were based on the Attention Restorative Theory (ART). Many researchers have developed the measuring tools to measure people's attention restorative effect. The scales were tested by exposure respondents to different environments, especially natural vs. urban settings. The 4 features of ART which includes being away, fascination, extent (coherence), and compatibility were adopted as the categories of the measuring scale items like the Perceived Restorative Scale (PRS). However, these items include several abstract descriptions that is hard to translate in to Chinese. The translation results come out ambiguous sentences which is hard to be understood by the respondents. Compare to the items in PRS, the attention restorative measurement scales developed by Staats 2003 are easier to translate. Instead of adopt the 4 features of the ART; the scale based its items on the recovery and reflection effect of the restorative environment. Although they carry different measuring items these items still measuring the restorative effect from the environment. Therefore, in our future studies that need to test in Chinese, the scale by Staats 2003 seems a better choice.