Biophilia Literature Matrix

Article Title: THE BIOPHILIA HYPOTHESIS

AND LIFE IN THE 21st CENTURY: INCREASING MENTAL
HEALTH OR INCREASING PATHOLOGY?
Authors: ELEONORA GULLONE (Monash University
Department of Psychology)
Date: 15 June 2000
Citation: Gullone, E. (2000). The biophilia hypothesis and life in
the 21st century: Increasing mental health or increasing
pathology?. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(3), 293-322.
Content: Investigates the biophilia hypothesis, and how this may
mean negative consequences in our cities that are devoid of
nature.
Objectivity: No conflict of interest apparent.
Manner Research Conducted: A comprehensive review of currently
existing literature.
Manner of Presentation:

Strengths: Significant number of studies cited, logical progression

of ideas.
Weaknesses: A fair amount of extraneous information which
doesnt directly relate to the authors main contention.
Conclusions: There is tentative evidence suggesting that lack of
nature in our lives is leading to psychological stress, though more
research is needed to determine if ths is truly a causal
relationship, and to what extent the effects are felt.

Article Title: Biophilia: Does Visual Contact with Nature Impact on

Health
and Well-Being?
Authors: Bjrn Grinde 1(Norwegian Institute of Public Health),
Grete Grindal Patil(Department of Plant and Environmental
Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences)
Date: 31 August 2009
Citation: Grinde, B., & Patil, G. G. (2009). Biophilia: does visual
contact with nature impact on health and well-being?.

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,

6(9), 2332-2343.
Content: This article investigated if negative effects occur from
lack of visible natural stimuli in the environment, such as plants.
Objectivity: Funding of study not clear, though no conflict of
interest seems likely.
Manner Research Conducted: They reviewed currently existing
litereature, most notably empirical studies in both indoor and
outdoor environments.
Manner of Presentation:
Strengths: Considerably bakground history of the topic was
provided, before moving into a review of the existing literature.
The background helps motivate the discussion nicely.
Weaknesses: Authors extrapolate conclusions a bit too far givent
the tentative nature of their cited studies.
Conclusions: It seems that humans do indeed suffer some
negative psychological effects in the absence of nature. However
I dont think the authors made a convincing enough case to

warrant their suggestion that resources be spent in bringing

nature into cities.

Article Title: Creativity in the Wild: Improving Creative Reasoning

through Immersion in Natural Settings
Authors: Ruth Ann Atchley (Department of Psychology, University
of Kansas), David L. Strayer (Department of Psychology,
University of Utah), Paul Atchley (Department of Psychology,
University of Kansas)
Date: December 12, 2012
Citation: Atchley, R. A., Strayer, D. L., & Atchley, P. (2012).
Creativity in the wild: Improving creative reasoning through
immersion in natural settings.
Content: Investigated the effects of Attention Restoration Theory
(ART), which uses natural stimuli, in improving creative problem
solving.
Objectivity: Funding not clear, though no apparent conflicts of
interest seem likely.

Manner Research Conducted: The authors conducted a study on

hikers in the wilderness. Hikers were segmented into pre-hile and
post-hike groups, and compared.
Manner of Presentation:
Strengths: Potential confounding variables were controlled for,
authors do not extrapolate conclusions too far.
Weaknesses: The sample sizes were quite small. Additionally, no
visual aids were presented in the article.
Conclusions: Being in nature does seem to aid creativity, but the
mechanism by which this happens is not understood. The authors
wisely mention this important distinction. As a preliminary finding
though, the results seem promising.