In the study, 164 participants watched either nature or indoor videos before or after a stressful task in the lab. When asked retrospectively whether watching the video was restorative or helpful for preparing for or recovering from the stress task, participants reported that it was. However, their immediate responses to the stress task (measured by self-reported stress, heart rate, heart rate variability, and salivary cortisol) did not differ clearly between conditions.

We also found no differences between conditions in participants’ immediate appraisal of the stressor, including how threatening they perceived it to be or how able they felt to cope with it, nor in the frequency of negative or positive thoughts about the stressful situation.

However, three-sided testing showed that small and sometimes moderate effects of nature could not be ruled out.

Key findings include:

• There was a disconnect between retrospective ratings of nature’s helpfulness and its effects on immediate acute stress.
• Although participants perceived the nature videos as restorative and helpful for managing stress in hindsight, this was not reflected in their immediate self-reported, autonomic, or hormonal stress responses.
• Virtual nature did not clearly influence how threatening participants perceived the stressor to be, how able they felt to cope with it, or how often they thought about positive or negative aspects of the stressful situation.

 While virtual nature has been shown to offer potential benefits, our findings highlight the importance of a nuanced discussion of the strength of its effects on immediate stress responses and of whether these effects are meaningful in practice.

You can find the full paper here