ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Engaging with nature and work: associations among the built and natural environment, experiences outside, and job engagement and creativity.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nature Connectedness and Work Engagement in the Relationship Between Emotional Exhaustion and Life Satisfaction Among Employees.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Article
- Testing the feasibility of 30 min of daily outdoor office work for stress management: A pilot study.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Assessing an Outdoor Office Work Intervention: Exploring the Relevance of Measuring Frequency, Perceived Stress, Quality of Life and Connectedness to Nature.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Nature relatedness, flow experience, and environmental behaviors in nature-based leisure activities.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: There is substantial evidence that contact with nature is related to positive health and well-being outcomes, but extensions of this research to work-related outcomes is sparse. Some organizations are redesigning workspaces to incorporate nature and adopting nature-related policies, warranting a need for empirical studies that test the influence of nature on employee outcomes. Methods: The present mixed-methods study tests and extends the biophilic work design model to examine associations among the built and natural environment at work and home, experiences of time spent outside (i.e., amount of time outside, enjoyment of time outside, outdoor activities), and motivational work outcomes (i.e., job engagement and creativity). Objective geographic data were combined with quantitative and qualitative survey responses from working adults ( Results: Our results broadly indicate that individuals who work and live in areas with greater natural amenities (i.e., access to water, topographic variation, temperate climates) spend more time outside and enjoy time outside to a greater degree, and these experiences are in turn associated with greater engagement and creativity at work. We did not find evidence that the surrounding built environment (i.e., urbanity) at work or home was associated with outdoor experiences or work-related outcomes. Additionally, six categories of outdoor activities were identified in the qualitative analyses - leisure activities, relaxation, physical activities, social interactions, tasks and errands, and travel. Discussion: The findings from this study provide evidence that the natural environment, particularly at home, can benefit work-related outcomes via greater time and enjoyment of time outside. This study has implications for employee time use and organizational effectiveness.
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.