test
Search publications, data, projects and authors

Article

English

ID: <

ftgriffithuniv:oai:research-repository.griffith.edu.au:10072/431258

>

·

DOI: <

10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102336

>

Where these data come from
Benefits of Nature Exposure on Cognitive Functioning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

The fast-paced, technology-driven demands of modern society give rise to heightened levels of cognitive overload and psychological fatigue which presents challenges for the cognitive health and development of young people. Beyond cognitive restoration, cognitive enhancement in childhood is a key influence on future educational, occupational, and social outcomes. One promising avenue of research relates to nature exposure and its potential to restore cognitive processes (restorative effect) and increase cognitive capacity for cognitive processing (instorative effect) in children and adolescents. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to provide clearer insight into the body of literature surrounding the benefits of nature on cognition for children and adolescents by providing a statistical synthesis of the conflicting reports in this area. Two meta-analyses were conducted to investigate the association (from 22 correlational studies) and effect (from 34 experimental studies) of nature exposure on cognition within children and adolescents. Findings revealed no association across correlational studies but small positive restorative effects and instorative effects effect across experimental studies—particularly for attention and executive functioning outcomes. Moderator analyses indicated that lengthier interventions produced significant nature effects over shorter interventions. Additionally, both children (<10 years) and adolescents (10–19 years) appeared to benefit equally from nature exposure interventions. The beneficial nature effect was observed for neurotypical youths; however, the findings for neurodivergent youths were inconclusive due to limited studies, thereby warranting further research in this population. Publication bias was not an issue, though sensitivity analyses revealed that more rigorous studies yielded smaller effect sizes than studies of lower methodological quality, indicating that findings should be taken with caution, and that stronger evidence in the investigation of ...

Your Feedback

Please give us your feedback and help us make GoTriple better.
Fill in our satisfaction questionnaire and tell us what you like about GoTriple!