Spending time in the forest or the field: qualitative semi-structured interviews in a randomized controlled cross-over trial with highly sensitive persons.

Introduction: The effects of spending time in forests have been subject to investigations in various countries around the world. Qualitative comparisons have been rarely done so far. Methods: Sixteen healthy highly sensitive persons (SV12 score ≥ 18) aged between 18 and 70 years were randomly assigned to groups spending 1 h in the forest and in the field at intervals of one week. Semi-structured interviews were conducted after each intervention and analyzed using a mixed-methods approach of content analysis and grounded theory. Results: Both natural environments induced feelings of inner calmness, inner cleansing, joy, freedom, connectedness, strengthening qualities, and heightened body awareness. The forest environment additionally offered emotional shelter, and showed advantages in promoting inner strength and self-concentration. Discussion: People with previous negative experiences in the forest may feel safer in fields because of the wider view and better overview. Important preconditions are enough time and the absence of a judgmental authority. The two environments induced in part different but also similar emotions which might be useful to promote psychological well-being differentially.

Spending Time in the Forest or the Field: Investigations on Stress Perception and Psychological Well-Being-A Randomized Cross-Over Trial in Highly Sensitive Persons.

Research suggests that stays in a forest promote relaxation and reduce stress compared to spending time in a city. The aim of this study was to compare stays in a forest with another natural environment, a cultivated field. Healthy, highly sensitive persons (HSP, SV12 score > 18) aged between 18 and 70 years spent one hour in the forest and in the field at intervals of one week. The primary outcome was measured using the Change in Subjective Self-Perception (CSP-14) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were measured using the Profile Of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire and by analyzing salivary cortisol. We randomized 43 participants. Thirty-nine were allocated and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (90% female, mean age 45 years). CSP-14 in part showed significant differences-total score (p = 0.054, Cohen's d = 0.319), item "integration" (p = 0.028, Cohen's d = 0.365)-favoring the effects of the forest. These effects were more pronounced in summer (August). In October, during rainfall, we detected no relevant differences. POMS only showed a significant difference in the subcategory "depression/anxiety" in favor of the field. The amount of cortisol in saliva was not different between the groups. A short-term stay in a forest in summer caused a greater improvement in mood and well-being in HSP than in a field. This effect was not detectable during bad weather in the fall.