ArticlePloS one2025
The effect of nature on creativity through mental imagery.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leaving space for imagination: mental imagery-informed teaching framework for enhancing imagery vividness in creative writing.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immersion in nature has been linked to wide-ranging benefits on mental health and cognitive functions, from reducing stress to enhancing creativity. However, a walk in nature is not always feasible, and whether a proxy for nature immersion via a mental walk in nature can elicit the same benefits as a physical walk remains largely unknown. Accordingly, the current study utilized guided imagery to examine whether a mental walk in nature would improve creativity in general and when compared to a mental walk in an urban environment. We implemented a within-subjects design, wherein participants completed both mental walk conditions (in a nature and urban environment) at least five days apart in counterbalanced order on an online platform. During each session, participants (N = 97) completed two pre-walk tasks assessing convergent (measured by the Remote Associates Test) and divergent creative thinking (measured by the Alternate Uses Test), followed by a mental walk in either a nature or urban environment, then finally the identical two post-walk creativity tasks. After five days, they repeated the same procedure with a mental walk in the other environment. While comparisons of post-walk creativity scores between the nature and urban environment did not significantly differ from each other, the comparisons between the pre- and post-walk creativity scores revealed a significant improvement in convergent creative thinking in the nature environment condition, but not the urban environment condition. Our results suggest that taking a mental walk in nature can enhance at least one aspect of creativity, therefore providing preliminary evidence for the potential to access the creative benefits of mentally immersing ourselves in nature. These findings have important implications for those who wish to enjoy the benefits of nature but are unable to readily access nature physically.
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.