The problem with studying nature
Taking people to a park and measuring how they feel has an obvious problem: no two days are the same. The weather changes, the noise, who walks by. That is why research on restorative environments has long used pictures, sound and, more and more, 360° video in virtual reality. It lets you show exactly the same place to everyone.
What the Drexel team did
In October 2026 a team at Drexel University in Philadelphia published a study with 32 adults in Building and Environment. Each person spent six minutes in five 360° environments:
- an indoor office with no nature;
- two ornamental gardens, modelled on Longwood Gardens in Pennsylvania;
- two natural landscapes, a forest and a meadow.
During each session a forehead sensor (fNIRS) measured oxygenation in the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain closely tied to mental effort. A wristband recorded heart rate, heart rate variability and skin conductance, a sign of nervous system arousal. Afterwards, each person rated how much they liked the scene and whether they felt restored.
What they found
- Natural landscapes were rated the most restorative and put the least load on the brain and nervous system.
- Gardens lowered prefrontal activity almost as much as wilder nature. At the same time they raised bodily arousal compared with the office. The authors call this "aroused fascination": the person is interested and alert, and still rests.
- The office showed more activity in a brain region linked to inward, self-focused thinking, the kind of rumination that comes with tiredness.
The authors are also clear about what they did not measure: smell, airflow, temperature. Real nature has all of that and a video does not.
What it means for whoever chooses the content
For people working with patients or residents, the most useful takeaway is that different places do different things. A calm, open landscape asks little. A garden full of colour and detail wakes attention up while still being restful. A closed space with no nature does not help you switch off.
That matches what we see in the field. Some sessions are about slowing down, and a meadow, a beach or a forest makes sense. Others are about giving the person something to look at and talk about, and a garden or a lively square can work better. The choice belongs to whoever runs the session, who knows the person in front of them.
It is also one of the reasons RVer uses real places filmed in 360°, with the sound of the place itself, rather than computer-generated scenery. Research on restorative environments increasingly works with filmed nature. We wrote about this in guided meditation or virtual reality and keep the evidence on stress and relaxation on our studies page.
The limit
Thirty-two healthy people in a lab are not inpatients. The study does not say a forest video treats anything. It says the brain responds differently to different kinds of place, even on video, and that it is worth choosing carefully.
Frequently asked questions
Is seeing nature in VR the same as being in nature?
Not entirely. Video has no smell, wind or temperature, and the study authors say so. Even so, the brain responded differently to filmed nature than to an office.
Which kind of landscape is most restful?
In this study, natural landscapes were the most restorative. Ornamental gardens came close, with more bodily arousal.