4.1 Article

Physiological Effects of Forest Recreation in a Young Conifer Forest in Hinokage Town, Japan

期刊

SILVA FENNICA
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 291-301

出版社

FINNISH SOC FOREST SCIENCE-NATURAL RESOURCES INST FINLAND
DOI: 10.14214/sf.213

关键词

blood pressure; heart rate variability; pulse rate; relaxation; Shinrin-yoku; therapeutic effects of forest; well-being

类别

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) - Japan [S: 16107007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is widely believed that coming into contact with forest environments is somehow beneficial to human well-being and comfort. In Japan, Shinrin-yoku (taking in the atmosphere of a forest) has been proposed to be a relaxation activity associated with forest recreation. The purpose of this study was to examine the physiological effects of forest recreation on the autonomic nervous activity. The subjects were twelve male university students (21.8 +/- 0.8 years old). Oil the first day of the experiment, six Subjects were sent to a forest area, and the other six to a city area. On the second day, each subject was sent to the area he did not visit on the first day as a cross check. The Subjects walked (15 minutes) around their assigned areas before noon, and sat on chairs viewing (15 minutes) the landscapes of their assigned areas in the afternoon. Heart rate variability (HRV), blood pressure, and pulse rate were measured as physiological indices. Measurements were taken at the place of accommodation in the morning, before and after walking, and before and after viewing at their assigned field areas. Pulse rate, diastolic blood pressure and LF/(LF+HF) (LF - low frequency, HF - high frequency) components of HRV were significantly lower in the forest area than in the city area. HF components of HRV tended to be higher in the forest than in the city. In conclusion, the results of the physiological measurements show that forest recreation enabled effective relaxation in people, both of the mind and body.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据