Recognizing the importance of near-home contact with nature for mental well-being based on the COVID-19 lockdown experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several urban landscape planning solutions have been introduced around the world to find a balance between developing urban spaces, maintaining and restoring biodiversity, and enhancing quality of human life. Our global mini-review, combined with analysis of big data collected from Google Trends at global scale, reveals the importance of enjoying day-to-day contact with nature and engaging in such activities as nature observation and identification and gardening for the mental well-being of humans during the COVID-19 pandemic. Home-based activities, such as watching birds from one’s window, identifying species of plants and animals, backyard gardening, and collecting information about nature for citizen science projects, were popular during the first lockdown in spring 2020, when people could not easily venture out of their homes. In our mini-review, we found 37 articles from 28 countries with a total sample of 114,466 people. These papers suggest that home-based engagement with nature was an entertaining and pleasant distraction that helped preserve mental well-being during a challenging time. According to Google Trends, interest in such activities increased during lockdown compared to the previous five years. Millions of people worldwide are chronically or temporarily confined to their homes and neighborhoods because of illness, childcare chores, or elderly care responsibility, which makes it difficult for them to travel far to visit such places as national parks, created through land sparing, where people go to enjoy nature and relieve stress. This article posits that for such people, living in an urban landscape designed to facilitate effortless contact with small natural areas is a more effective way to receive the mental health benefits of contact with nature than visiting a sprawling nature park on rare occasions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".