IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i14p11250-d1197753.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative Model Study of the Psychological Recovery Benefit of Landscape Environment Based on Eye Movement Tracking Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Xinhui Fei

    (College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 15 Shangxiadian Rd., Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Yanqin Zhang

    (College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 15 Shangxiadian Rd., Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Deyi Kong

    (College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 15 Shangxiadian Rd., Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Qitang Huang

    (College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 15 Shangxiadian Rd., Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Minhua Wang

    (College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 15 Shangxiadian Rd., Fuzhou 350002, China
    Engineering Research Center for Forest Park of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Jianwen Dong

    (College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 15 Shangxiadian Rd., Fuzhou 350002, China
    Engineering Research Center for Forest Park of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Fuzhou 350002, China)

Abstract

From the perspective of landscape and human health, we use the Self-Rating Restoration Scale (SRRS) as a tool to explore the mental health restoration benefits brought by a landscape environment to individuals and explore the characteristics of individual movement behavior when viewing the landscape through the eye movement tracking technology. We selected average blink duration, average gaze length, average saccade amplitude, blink number, number of fixation points, saccade number, and average pupil diameter as experimental indicators for data monitoring. Based on the eye movement heat map obtained by data visualization processing and the results of correlation analysis, we summarized the eye movement behavior characteristics of individuals when viewing the restorative landscape. We try to construct a quantitative evaluation model of the landscape mental recovery benefit with the objective eye movement index as the independent variable through the method of curve estimation. The study results show that individual eye movement behavior is related to the landscape type and the level of psychological recovery is also different. (1)The more singular that the constituent elements are, the more widespread and concentrated the regional distribution of individual attention areas, and the relative psychological recovery benefit is relatively weak. The more complex that the constituent elements are, the more scattered and smaller the individual interest area, and the psychological recovery benefit is better. Brightly colored, dynamic landscapes are easier to form areas of interest to improve the psychological response to the human body. (2) The psychological recovery benefit of the landscape is directly proportional to the changing trend of the average blink duration, number of fixation points, and number of saccades and is inversely proportional to the changing trend of the average gaze length. (3) The objective eye movement index of average blink duration can quantitatively predict the psychological recovery benefit value of the landscape environment. The number of fixation points, the number of saccades, and the average fixation length could predict the psychological recovery benefits of the landscape, while the other indicators had no prediction effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinhui Fei & Yanqin Zhang & Deyi Kong & Qitang Huang & Minhua Wang & Jianwen Dong, 2023. "Quantitative Model Study of the Psychological Recovery Benefit of Landscape Environment Based on Eye Movement Tracking Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11250-:d:1197753
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11250/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11250/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shilun Zhang & Xiaolong Zhao & Zixi Zeng & Xuan Qiu, 2019. "The Influence of Audio-Visual Interactions on Psychological Responses of Young People in Urban Green Areas: A Case Study in Two Parks in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-14, May.
    2. Maraja Riechers & Werner Henkel & Moritz Engbers & Joern Fischer, 2019. "Stories of Favourite Places in Public Spaces: Emotional Responses to Landscape Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-11, July.
    3. Sarah R. Payne & Neil Bruce, 2019. "Exploring the Relationship between Urban Quiet Areas and Perceived Restorative Benefits," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, May.
    4. Yu Wu & Zhixiong Zhuo & Qunyue Liu & Kunyong Yu & Qitang Huang & Jian Liu, 2021. "The Relationships between Perceived Design Intensity, Preference, Restorativeness and Eye Movements in Designed Urban Green Space," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-16, October.
    5. G.-Fivos Sargentis & Panayiotis Dimitriadis & Romanos Ioannidis & Theano Iliopoulou & Demetris Koutsoyiannis, 2019. "Stochastic Evaluation of Landscapes Transformed by Renewable Energy Installations and Civil Works," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-13, July.
    6. Izabela Krzeptowska-Moszkowicz & Łukasz Moszkowicz & Karolina Porada, 2022. "Urban Sensory Gardens with Aromatic Herbs in the Light of Climate Change: Therapeutic Potential and Memory-Dependent Smell Impact on Human Wellbeing," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    7. Spielhofer, R. & Thrash, T. & Hayek, U. Wissen & Grêt-Regamey, A. & Salak, B. & Grübel, J. & Schinazi, V.R., 2021. "Physiological and behavioral reactions to renewable energy systems in various landscape types," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Höfer, Tim & Sunak, Yasin & Siddique, Hafiz & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Wind farm siting using a spatial Analytic Hierarchy Process approach: A case study of the Städteregion Aachen," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 222-243.
    9. Coline van Everdingen & Peter Bob Peerenboom & Koos van der Velden & Philippe Delespaul, 2023. "Vital Needs of Dutch Homeless Service Users: Responsiveness of Local Services in the Light of Health Equity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    10. Zhengsong Lin & Yuting Wang & Xinyue Ye & Yuxi Wan & Tianjun Lu & Yu Han, 2022. "Effects of Low-Carbon Visualizations in Landscape Design Based on Virtual Eye-Movement Behavior Preference," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Massimiliano Masullo & Federico Cioffi & Jian Li & Luigi Maffei & Giovanni Ciampi & Sergio Sibilio & Michelangelo Scorpio, 2023. "Urban Park Lighting Quality Perception: An Immersive Virtual Reality Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Tian Gao & Huiyi Liang & Yuxuan Chen & Ling Qiu, 2019. "Comparisons of Landscape Preferences through Three Different Perceptual Approaches," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-13, November.
    13. Maarten Wolsink, 2018. "Co-production in distributed generation: renewable energy and creating space for fitting infrastructure within landscapes," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 542-561, May.
    14. Rui Chen & Yu Gao & Ruixin Zhang & Zhi Zhang & Weikang Zhang & Huan Meng & Tong Zhang, 2023. "How Does the Experience of Forest Recreation Spaces in Different Seasons Affect the Physical and Mental Recovery of Users?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-24, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesco Aletta & Jian Kang, 2019. "Promoting Healthy and Supportive Acoustic Environments: Going beyond the Quietness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-4, December.
    2. Pohl, Johannes & Rudolph, David & Lyhne, Ivar & Clausen, Niels-Erik & Aaen, Sara Bjørn & Hübner, Gundula & Kørnøv, Lone & Kirkegaard, Julia K., 2021. "Annoyance of residents induced by wind turbine obstruction lights: A cross-country comparison of impact factors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    3. Ioannidis, R. & Mamassis, N. & Efstratiadis, A. & Koutsoyiannis, D., 2022. "Reversing visibility analysis: Towards an accelerated a priori assessment of landscape impacts of renewable energy projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    4. Xinyi Chen & Yuyang Wang & Tao Huang & Zhengsong Lin, 2022. "Research on Digital Experience and Satisfaction Preference of Plant Community Design in Urban Green Space," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Stephan Bosch & Lucas Schwarz, 2019. "The Energy Transition from Plant Operators’ Perspective—A Behaviorist Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-28, March.
    6. Fábio T. F. Silva & Alexandre Szklo & Amanda Vinhoza & Ana Célia Nogueira & André F. P. Lucena & Antônio Marcos Mendonça & Camilla Marcolino & Felipe Nunes & Francielle M. Carvalho & Isabela Tagomori , 2022. "Inter-sectoral prioritization of climate technologies: insights from a Technology Needs Assessment for mitigation in Brazil," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(7), pages 1-39, October.
    7. Ayodele, T.R. & Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Odigie, O. & Munda, J.L., 2018. "A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1853-1869.
    8. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    9. Yu Cao & Cong Xu & Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman & Nur Mardhiyah Aziz, 2022. "A Systematic Review of Green Building Development in China: Advantages, Challenges and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-29, September.
    10. Agnieszka Jaszczak & Ewelina Pochodyła & Katarina Kristianova & Natalia Małkowska & Jan K. Kazak, 2021. "Redefinition of Park Design Criteria as a Result of Analysis of Well-Being and Soundscape: The Case Study of the Kortowo Park (Poland)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Hossein Yousefi & Saheb Ghanbari Motlagh & Mohammad Montazeri, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making System for Wind Farm Site-Selection Using Geographic Information System (GIS): Case Study of Semnan Province, Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-27, June.
    12. Gianni Talamini & Ting Liu & Roula El-Khoury & Di Shao, 2023. "Visibility and symbolism of corporate architecture: A multi-method approach for visual impact assessment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(9), pages 2407-2429, November.
    13. Deveci, Muhammet & Cali, Umit & Kucuksari, Sadik & Erdogan, Nuh, 2020. "Interval type-2 fuzzy sets based multi-criteria decision-making model for offshore wind farm development in Ireland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    14. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    15. Mohammed Ifkirne & Houssam El Bouhi & Siham Acharki & Quoc Bao Pham & Abdelouahed Farah & Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh, 2022. "Multi-Criteria GIS-Based Analysis for Mapping Suitable Sites for Onshore Wind Farms in Southeast France," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-26, October.
    16. Goraj, Rafał & Kiciński, Marcin & Ślefarski, Rafał & Duczkowska, Anna, 2023. "Validity of decision criteria for selecting power-to-gas projects in Poland," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Ali, Shahid & Taweekun, Juntakan & Techato, Kuaanan & Waewsak, Jompob & Gyawali, Saroj, 2019. "GIS based site suitability assessment for wind and solar farms in Songkhla, Thailand," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1360-1372.
    18. Nima Mirzaei, 2022. "A Multicriteria Decision Framework for Solar Power Plant Location Selection Problem with Pythagorean Fuzzy Data: A Case Study on Green Energy in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    19. Baseer, M.A. & Rehman, S. & Meyer, J.P. & Alam, Md. Mahbub, 2017. "GIS-based site suitability analysis for wind farm development in Saudi Arabia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1166-1176.
    20. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11250-:d:1197753. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.