ArticleHeliyon2023
Multimodal assessment of effects of urban environments on psychological wellbeing.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of EEG, fMRI, and fNIRS Studies on the Psychological Impact of Nature on Well-Being.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Pooled it
- Mapping Eco-Affective Health: A Spatial Framework for Climate-Related Emotional Responses and Mental Health in Urban Systems.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- Stressful urban walks: an experimental design for measuring physiological and psychological stress in virtual urban environments.Virtual reality · 2026Article
- Article
- Architecturally Mediated Allostasis and Neurosustainability: A Proposed Theoretical Framework for the Impact of the Built Environment on Neurocognitive Health.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Exploring urban mental health using mobile EEG - a systematic review.PLOS mental health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The built environment is a ubiquitous factor of modern human life, which fundamentally affects human wellbeing. Most existing research on the psychological effects of urban environments is predominantly based on subjective self-report measures, which provide valuable insights into subjective experiences, but are also affected by conscious and subconscious bias. In the current study, we evaluate a multimodal approach to capturing wellbeing by employing objective mobile physiological and neurophysiological measurement technologies alongside self-reports to capture the impact of two different urban environments. Moreover, we endeavoured to comprehensively measure and, when possible, control the physical aspects of the environment. Our study specifically aimed to discover differences between psychological wellbeing indicators in adults across low-density vs. moderate-density urban environments. Data collection took place in two urban outdoor locations in Australia. Statistical comparison of the two locations indicated that low urban density led to comparatively higher levels of psychological wellbeing compared to moderate urban density. Self-reports indicated that the low-density environment led to higher levels of subjective feelings of comfort and safety and reduced levels of negative mood. In line with the subjective reports, in the low-density environment compared to the moderate-density environment, individuals showed higher levels of EEG theta activity, while EEG beta and heart rate measures were lower. The research outcome provides insights into how urban density affects people's wellbeing and showcases the benefits of employing ecologically-valid multimodal psychological-environmental measurement approaches to effectively evaluate the psychological impacts of built environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.