Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology

ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________

Biophilic Design in Architecture: Impacts

on Well-being
Elaheh Hassankhouei1* , Maryam mojtabavi 2
1
-Department of Architecture, Ferdows Institute of higher education, Mashhad, Iran.
2-
Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Ferdows Ferdows institute of higher education, Mashhad,
Iran.
Abstract
In the last ten years, ‘nature’ and biophilic design have received widespread attention in architecture, especially
in response to growing environmental challenges such as psychological and mental disorders. The biophilia
hypothesis posits an innate biological and genetic connection between humans and nature, including an emotional
dimension to this connection. The biophilic design builds on this hypothesis in an attempt to design human-nature
connections into the built environment. However, open questions and controversies remain regarding
conceptualizing and addressing ‘nature’ in practice and research The present research aims to investigate the
components of biophilic architecture and examine their impact on well-being in successful case studies. In the
end, solutions are proposed to enhance the sense of well-being through biophilic architecture. A mixed qualitative-
quantitative approach has been employed to achieve the practical objectives of the research. In the research
process, initially, the components related to biophilic design, including three categories nature in space, analog
nature, and nature of space, were extracted through library and documentary studies. Then, based on the data
obtained from the qualitative section, a researcher-made questionnaire was provided to experts in the fields of
architecture, psychology, environment, and health. The results of the experts' questionnaire, analyzed using the
SPSS software, revealed that the influence of nature on space components was greater than other components. In
the third step, the indicators of nature in space, examined in the case studies, and solutions were proposed to
promote a sense of well-being through biophilic architecture.
Key words: Nature, Biophilic design ,Architecture, well-being,

1-Introduction
According to a majority of researchers, the proximity of health and social prosperity is of great importance for the
21st-century human population, particularly in dense urban environments where the infiltration of nature is limited
by technologically advanced lifestyles (Freudenberg, Galea, & Vlahov, 2006; World Health Organization, 2007;
Wolch, Byrne & Newell, 2014). Extensive research in this field indicates that these urban environments contribute
more to health concerns than they solve (Sclar, Garau & Carolini, 2005; Rydin et al., 2012; Hardoy, Mitlin &
Satterthwaite, 1992; McMichael, 2000). A significant health concern in poorly designed buildings is the lack of
adequate sunlight and ventilation, resulting in compromised indoor air quality. Insufficient physical comfort and
poor acoustics contribute to the emergence of Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) (Boubekri, 2008; Burge, 2004).
The concept of biophilia, initially introduced by Erich Fromm, is a conclusion drawn from humanity's innate
affinity for nature (Fromm, 1973). Biophilia emphasizes the pivotal role of nature in enhancing human physical
and mental well-being. Numerous studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of biophilia, particularly in
healthcare environments, where nature contributes to restoration and healing (Frumkin, 2001; Reeve et al., 2017).
Restorative environment design aims to create spaces that promote human health and well-being by incorporating
specific environmental features (Kaplan, 1995; Scopelliti et al., 2019).
Soderlund and Newman (2015) explored the evidence supporting the intrinsic psychological and physiological
connection between humans and nature, as well as the emerging research highlighting the social, environmental,
and economic benefits of biophilia. Beatley (2016) emphasizes that nature is not an optional aspect of modern
urban life but an essential quality. Newman et al. (2017) further argue that integrating biophilia into buildings and
cities can help reduce reliance on fossil fuels and create more resilient urban areas. The significant benefits of
biophilia necessitate the conservation and restoration of existing natural elements, as well as the exploration of
new ways to incorporate nature in the twenty-first century (Newman et al., 2017; Beatley, 2016).

5817
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
This research aims to explore the components of biophilic architecture and examine their impact on human well-
being. Additionally, strategies are proposed to enhance a sense of well-being through biophilic architecture. To
achieve these objectives, the following questions are addressed:
-What are the components of biophilic design?
-How do biophilic elements contribute to human well-being?
-What strategies of biophilic architecture are recommended for promoting a sense of well-being?
2-Methodology
Given the research objective, this study employs a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, which are
practical. The data collection process involved reviewing texts and library documents. Initially, the components
of biophilic architecture were extracted by examining the theoretical foundations and prior research in the field.
Literature searches were conducted in psychology, health, environment, and architecture databases including
SCOPUS, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Google Scholar. The search terms and their synonyms included: 1)
Biophilia, 2) environmental psychology, 3) Built environment, 4) Well-being, and 5) Restorative environment.
Subsequently, a researcher-developed questionnaire was randomly distributed to 30 specialized professors in the
research field, including architecture (7 individuals), psychology (8 individuals), health (7 individuals), and the
environment (8 individuals). The purpose of this questionnaire was to prioritize the components and measure their
effectiveness on well-being. The collected data from the questionnaire were analyzed using SPSS 26 software,
and a one-sample t-test was employed as a parametric method to test the population mean. In the following step,
each of the direct components of biophilic design was analyzed using successful samples, and the results regarding
their impact on well-being were examined. Finally, design solutions were proposed to enhance well-being through
each of the direct components of biophilic design. The research process diagram is presented in Diagram 1.
Biophilia and its manifestation in design, known as biophilic design, have been the subject of scholarly discourse.
The term "Biophilia" was initially introduced by German psychologist Fromm (1973), who described it as "the
passionate love of life and of all that is alive." Its roots can be traced back to ancient Greek, where "bios" means
life and "philia" means love. American biologist Wilson (1984) later popularized the term and defined biophilia

5818
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
as "the urge to affiliate with other forms of life" (Kellert and Wilson, 1993). Throughout human evolution, it has

been observed that 99% of living species have developed adaptive responses to the natural environment and its
various influences (Kellert and Calabrese, 2015). These responses have fostered a long-standing reliance on nature
and its resources. Biophilic design, on the other hand, represents the interdisciplinary integration of biophilia into
the design principles of the built environment (Kellert et al., 2011).
3-1- Origins of biophilic design
Biophilic design goes beyond the concept of biophilia and incorporates various theories from environmental
psychology that highlight humans' inherent connection to nature. These theories shed light on how interactions
with natural elements contribute to both physical and mental well-being (Peters and D'Penna, 2020; Söderlund
and Newman, 2015).
This paper investigates biophilic design from the perspectives of environmental psychology and architectural
design, identifying six theories that provide a contextual understanding for the literature review and form the
theoretical basis for the development of biophilic design.
3-1-1- Restorative Environmental Design (RED)
Restorative Environmental Design (RED) seeks to replenish individuals' emotional reserves and offer assistance
in mentally challenging situations or distracting surroundings. RED proposes that natural environments are more
effective in restoring Directed Attention resources, which are crucial for focus, alertness, sustained cognitive tasks,
problem-solving, and adaptive decision-making. ( Kaplan, 1995)
3-1-2- Place Attachment Theory
Place Attachment Theory examines the relationship between individuals and specific locations, encompassing a
sense of comfort and adaptation to the surroundings ( Altman,1992). It surpasses sensory or visual elements and
incorporates emotional connections and memories that shape an individual's bond with a place (Stedman, 2003).
3-1-3- Attention Restoration Theory (ART)
ART is relevant to biophilic design as it addresses attention fatigue and cognitive depletion ( Kaplan, 1995). ART
recognizes attention as a resource necessary for adaptability to the environment and task completion ( Kaplan,
1989). Nature has been found to have restorative benefits, calming and stimulating the mind, enhancing well-
being and productivity, and providing relief from fatigue and reduced performance resulting from prolonged use
of Directed Attention ( Kaplan, 1995, Berto, 2005)
3-1-4- Stress Reduction Theory (SRT)
Stress Reduction Theory (SRT) centers on the rejuvenating advantages of natural outdoor environments following
excessive psychological or physiological arousal, as well as excessively low arousal.SRT examines the impact of
emotional stressors on fatigue and emphasizes the positive transformations in physiological systems, behavior,
emotional states, and cognitive functioning that occur as a result of exposure to nature.This theory established the
groundwork for subsequent research investigating the stress-reducing effects of various forms of nature, including
images, scents, and vistas, in diverse settings. (Ulrich, 1983).

5819
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
3-1-5- Prospect-Refuge Theory
The Prospect-Refuge Theory, stemming from the field of landscape aesthetics, explores individuals' spatial
experience preferences and posits that specific spatial arrangements, termed "Prospect" and "Refuge," are inherent
evolutionary inclinations shared by all people. Prospect pertains to the inclination for open areas that provide
visibility and the ability to observe potential dangers, while Refuge represents the tendency to seek out protected
spaces away from activity where one can find retreat. (Appleton, 1975)
3-2- Defining biophilic design
Biophilic design, an integration of nature into architectural practices, has emerged from concepts in
environmental psychology. Since 2001, this concept has been interpreted in various ways by scholars and
professionals. Heerwagen and Hase (2001) were pioneers in defining characteristics of biophilic architecture,
identifying eight features related to habitability, natural elements, design processes, geometry, joyfulness, and
enticement. Kellert et al. (2008) presented a more systematic interpretation, proposing two dimensions, six
elements, and over seventy attributes. Other researchers, including Heerwagen and Gregory (2008), Hildebrand
(2008), and Cramer and Browning (2008), suggested perceptible attributes of natural spaces that can be
incorporated into spatial layouts. Terrapin Bright Green outlined fourteen patterns of biophilic design based on
these categories (Browning et al., 2014). Kellert and Calabrese (2015) further expanded the framework,
introducing twenty-four attributes within three categories. These frameworks have been revised and updated by
their proponents (Browning and Ryan, 2020; Kellert, 2018). Xue et al. (2019) highlighted the connections with
nature from individual and societal perspectives. Three representative conceptual frameworks (Browning and
Ryan, 2020; Kellert, 2008b, 2018) have been selected for comparative analysis and serve as the basis for
establishing criteria in architectural certifications such as LBC, WELL, and LEED. They have also been applied
in various studies on biophilic design (Abdelaal and Soebarto, 2019; Aye et al., 2019; Gillis and Gatersleben,

5820
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________

5821
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
3

2015; Park and Lee, 2019; Peters and D’Penna, 2020). Given Browning and Ryan's (2020) focus on the
biological responses and their impact on mental and physical health, physiological well-being, and cognitive
performance, their perspective on biophilic design patterns has been chosen as the framework for this research
(2022, al et Zhong). In the following sections, we will examine the biophilic design patterns according to
Browning and Ryan. These patterns are grouped into three main categories: "patterns of nature in space," "patterns
of natural analogies," and "patterns of space configuration" (Diagram2)
3-3- Biophilic design for well_being

5822
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
Biophilic design plays a crucial role in promoting well-being, which is a universal goal for individuals and
societies worldwide. Well-being encompasses multiple dimensions, including physical, economic, social,
emotional, and psychological aspects (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013).

The positive effects of biophilic design on well-being have been acknowledged, emphasizing the integration of
nature into architectural spaces (Heerwagen, 2009). Interactions with nature have been shown to facilitate healing,
enhance cognitive abilities, and foster a sense of community (Kellert, 2005). Biophilic design is rooted in the
concept of biophilia, which proposes that humans have an inherent connection and attraction to nature (Wilson,
1993).
3-3-1- Biophilic Design and Mind-body Impacts
The impact of biophilic design extends beyond promoting well-being and encompasses significant effects on both
the mind and body. Frederick Law Olmsted, an American landscape architect, recognized the rejuvenating effects
of natural scenery on mental and physical health (Olmsted, 1993). Well-being is shaped by the interplay of
physical, mental, and spiritual needs, with the environment playing a pivotal role in fulfilling these needs (Maslow,
1962; Day, 02b). Environmental psychologists emphasize the reciprocal relationship between humans and their
surroundings, highlighting how the environment can stimulate and influence human responses (Ojamaa, 2016).
Positive environmental qualities, such as light, sound, and vegetation, have a beneficial impact on human health
and well-being (Kopec, 2006). People naturally gravitate towards environments that offer positive attributes and
neurological nourishment, which contribute to their overall well-being (Salingaros & Masden, 2008; Biederman
& Vessel, 2006).
3-3-2- Cognitive Functionality and Performance
Cognitive functionality and performance are vital aspects of human mental agility. Engaging in tasks that require
focused attention, such as reading, calculations, and analysis, can lead to mental exhaustion and depletion of
cognitive resources (Kellert et al., 2008; Van den Berg et al., 2007). Nonetheless, interactions with nature offer
opportunities for mental rejuvenation, leading to enhanced cognitive performance (Browning et al., 2014)
3-3-3- Psychological Health and Well-being
Interactions with nature have an impact on psychological health and well-being, influencing aspects such as
concentration and emotions. Research indicates that experiences in natural environments contribute to higher
emotional restoration and lower occurrences of negative emotions when compared to urban environments (Alcock
et al., 2014; Barton & Pretty, 2010; Hartig et al., 2003). The psychological response mechanism is influenced by
factors such as past experiences, cultural influences, and societal norms (Browning et al., 2014).
3-3-4- Physiological Health and Well-being
Exposure to nature has been proven to be effective in reducing stress and promoting restoration, with both
physiological and psychological responses playing a role. Physiological benefits include lowered blood pressure,
decreased stress hormone levels, improved mood, and increased relaxation (Ulrich et al., 1991; Grahn et al., 2010).
Natural environments offer opportunities for mental disengagement from stressors and facilitate psychological
rejuvenation (Hartig et al., 2003). Biophilic design, incorporating nature into the built environment, has
demonstrated positive effects on various aspects of well-being, including cognitive functionality, psychological
health, stress reduction, and restoration. These findings underscore the significance of considering nature and

5823
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
biophilic design principles when creating environments that promote human well-being and enhance overall
quality of life.
Studies have examined the physiological effects of biophilic design on various human body systems. Interactions
with nature have been found to have positive impacts on the auditory, musculoskeletal, respiratory, circadian
systems, and overall physical comfort (Park et al., 2009). Exposure to nature elicits physiological responses such
as muscle relaxation, as well as reductions in diastolic blood pressure and stress hormone levels (Park et al., 2009).
Short-term increases in heart rate and stress hormone levels, which can occur when encountering unfamiliar but
information-rich spaces, may actually have beneficial effects on physiological health (Kandel et al., 2013). Design
interventions can mitigate physiological responses to environmental stressors, facilitating the restoration of bodily
resources and preventing harm to the system (Steg et al., 2012). Moreover, apart from the physiological benefits,
biophilic design has been linked to stress reduction, enhanced cognitive performance, and improvements in
emotion and mood (Browning et al., 2014). However, assessing the effectiveness of biophilic patterns and ameters
poses challenges due to the complex nature of variables, shifting baselines, and the intrusive nature of certain data
collection techniques (Ryan et al., 2014).

5824
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
4-Data analysis
In the first step of the research, a review of the theoretical background and literature revealed that the components
and indicators of biophilic architecture have a significant impact on individuals' well-being. These components
consist of three main aspects: "Nature in the Space," "Nature Analogue," and "Nature of the Space," each with its

unique indicators. In the second step, to prioritize the components and indicators and compare their influence on
well-being, a researcher-developed questionnaire was provided to specialized experts. After analyzing the data,
the findings presented in Table 4 were extracted.

5825
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
The results indicated that the component of nature in the Space has the most significant impact, and the indicators
of visual connection with nature, presence of water, non-visual connection with nature, connection with natural
systems,dynamic and diffuse light, thermal and airflow variability, non-rhythmic sensory stimuli have been
assigned the highest scores in that order. In the third step, the influence of indicators of the nature in the Space
component through the well-being was analyzed using successful case studies to show how indicators of nature
in the Space component affect the enhancement of residents' well-being (Table3)

4-1- Biophilic design approaches and elements

This study presents an optimized framework for biophilic design, aiming to incorporate "nature" into architecture
to promote well-being. The framework comprises three essential design approaches and encompasses fourteen
key elements (as shown in Diagram2). We interpret these design approaches and elements to provide a more
tangible understanding of the concept of biophilic design for architects and other design professionals. Through
careful analysis, we extract the most significant biophilic design elements from various forms of "nature" that
have been identified. In terms of biophilic design strategies and examples, proponents of this approach have
proposed numerous strategies, priorities, and considerations. These have been discussed at different scales
including city
planning, indoor environments, and specific buildings. In this study, we present a selection of design
strategies that can be employed to implement diverse biophilic designs in architecture.

5826
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________

5827
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
5- Conclusion and further research
Biophilic architecture is an approach that combines nature with the built environment in a harmonious way. It
acknowledges the connection between humans and nature, recognizing how nature affects our well-being,
productivity, and overall quality of life. Biophilia has always been an essential part of human habitats, and recent
research has reaffirmed its importance. The Biophilia hypothesis, pioneered by Kellert, and the 14 patterns
proposed by Browning, Clancy, and Ryan, have laid the foundation for the development and exploration of
biophilic design. By following these principles, architects and designers can create spaces that promote a sense of
calm, vitality, and connection to nature. To understand the components of biophilic architecture and their impact
on well-being, a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods was used. The research included data collection
through a literature review and the distribution of a researcher-made questionnaire to specialized professors in the
fields of architecture, psychology, health, and the environment. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS
software and the one-sample t-test to measure the effectiveness of the components on well-being. The study also
analyzed the impact of each direct component of biophilic design on well-being through successful samples. Based
on the findings, design solutions were proposed to enhance well-being by incorporating the direct components of
biophilic design. However, there are still unanswered questions regarding the application of biophilic design in
architecture. Despite its relatively recent implementation of about two decades, the concept of biophilic design is
rarely interpreted using architectural language such as typology, order, and context. To advance the field, future
research should analyze biophilic buildings from architectural perspectives, considering elements such as
tectonics, form, technology, and representation. Key inquiries include how biophilic design enhances architectural
forms, how it can be explained typologically, how it influences spatial organization and order, and how it relates
to the site and context. Currently, the biophilic design framework lacks explicit design strategies and guidelines
for translating these approaches into architectural design. Existing literature only provides general strategies and
considerations. Additionally, interdisciplinary knowledge is crucial for linking design strategies and benefits,
while collaboration between professions and financial considerations needs further exploration. Building
technology plays a vital role in materializing biophilic architecture, necessitating investigations into construction
techniques and addressing potential defect

References:
[1] Abdel-Aziz, A., El-Shimy, H., & Elhosary, A. (2023). Designing for Nature: Incorporating Natural
Habitats in Architecture. Journal of Sustainable Design, 12(3), 45-58.
[2] Abdel-Aziz, A., Nassar, D. M., Elcherif, I. A., & Al-Hagla , K. S. (2023). Design Studio Environment:
Using Biophilic Patterns for Creative Performance. In LET IT GROW, LET US PLAN, LET IT GROW.
Nature-based Solutions for Sustainable Resilient Smart Green and Blue Cities. Proceedings of REAL
CORP 2023, 28th International Conference on Urban Development, Regional Planning and Information
Society (pp. 183-194).
[3] -Abdelaal, M., & Soebarto, V. (2019). The Impact of Biophilic Design on Building Occupants: A
Review. Buildings, 9(8), 173.
[4] -Ardiani, F. A., Hakim, R. R., & Lusiastuti, A. M. (2020). Biophilic Design in Public Spaces: A Review
of Literature. Journal of Environmental and Planning Management, 3(2), 42-50.
[5] -Ardiani, Y. M., Prawata, A. G., & Sholihin, A. (2020, February). Application of biophilic architecture
in apartment design. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 426, No. 1, p.
012105). IOP Publishing.
[6] Alcock, I., White, M. P., Wheeler, B. W., Fleming, L. E., & Depledge, M. H. (2014). Longitudinal effects
on mental health of moving to greener and less green urban areas. Environmental Science & Technology,
48(2), 1247–1255. Appleton, J. (1975). The Experience of Landscape. John Wiley & Sons.
[7] Aye, L., Gatersleben, B., & Andrews, M. (2019). The Impact of Biophilic Interventions in Urban Spaces
on Residents’ Well-Being. Journal of Urban Design, 24(6), 776-796.
[8] Barton, J., & Pretty, J. (2010). What is the Best Dose of Nature and Green Exercise for Improving Mental
Health? A Multi-Study Analysis. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(10), 3947–3955.
[9] Beatley, T. (2016). Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature into Urban Design and Planning. Island Press.

5828
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
[10] Berto, R. (2005). Exposure to Restorative Environments Helps Restore Attentional Capacity: A Review
of the Literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-12.
[11] Biederman, I., & Vessel, E. A. (2006). Perceptual Pleasure and the Brain. American Scientist, 94(3),
249-255.
[12] Bloomer, K. (2008). Nature and the Idea of a Man-Made Environment: Creating a Cultural Landscape.
In The Handbook of Design for Sustainability (pp. 16-27). Bloomsbury Publishing.
[13] Boubekri, M. (2008). Daylighting, Architecture, and Health: Building Design Strategies. Architectural
Press.
[14] Browning, W. D., Ryan, C., & Clancy, J. O. (2014). Biophilic Design Patterns: Emerging Nature-Based
Parameters for Health and Well-Being in the Built Environment. International Journal of Architectural
Research, 8(2), 62–76.
[15] Browning, W. D., Ryan, C. O., & Clancy, J. O. (2014). 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design: Improving
Health and Well-Being in the Built Environment. Terrapin Bright Green LLC.
[16] Browning, W. D., & Ryan, C. O. (2020). Biophilic Design: Practices for Health and Well-Being. Island
Press.
[17] Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). About Social Determinants of Health. - Day, C. (02b).
The Influence of the Environment on Health. In Health and the Environment in the Southeastern United
States (pp. 31–40). Springer.
[18] Chang, C. W., & Chen, C. F. (2005). A Study on the Effectiveness of Daylighting Design in Office
Spaces. Building and Environment, 40(5), 681-691.
[19] Choi, J. H., & Park, Y. (2020). The Impact of Green Building Certification on Office Building Occupants'
Experiences: Focusing on Indoor Environmental Quality and Sustainability. Sustainability, 12(23),
10047.
[20] Choi, J. Y., & Park, S. J. (2020). A Study on the Application of Biophilic Design Pattern in Educational
space. Journal of the Korean Institute of Educational Facilities, 27(3), 3-14.
[21] Day, C. (02b). The Influence of the Environment on Health. In Health and the Environment in the
Southeastern United States (pp. 31–40). Springer. Earthscan.
[22] Freudenberg, N., Galea, S., & Vlahov, D. (2006). Cities and the Health of the Public. Vanderbilt
University Press.
[23] Fromm, E. (1973). The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
[24] Fromm, E. (1973). The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
[25] Frumkin, H. (2001). Beyond Toxicity: Human Health and the Natural Environment. American Journal
of Preventive Medicine, 20(3), 234-240.
[26] Gillis, K., & Gatersleben, B. (2015). A Review of Psychological Literature on the Health and Well-Being
Benefits of Biophilic Design. Buildings, 5(3), 948-963.
[27] Gou, Z., Wang, X., & Li, Y. (2014). A Study on the Impact of Green Roofs on the Thermal Performance
of Buildings. Energy and Buildings, 81, 411-416.
[28] Grahn, P., Tenngart Ivarsson, C., Stigsdotter, U. K., & Bengtsson, I.-L. (2010). Using Affordances as a
Health-Promoting Tool in a Therapeutic Garden. Journal of Therapeutic Horticulture, 20(1), 33–44.
[29] Grahn, P., Tenngart Ivarsson, C., Stigsdotter, U. A., & Bengtsson, I. L. (2010). Using affordances as a
health-promoting tool in a therapeutic garden. Journal of Therapeutic Horticulture,
[30] 20(2), 18–29.
[31] Hardoy, J. E., Mitlin, D., & Satterthwaite, D. (1992). Environmental Problems in Third World Cities.
Earthscan.
[32] Hartig, T., Mang, M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Restorative Effects of Natural Environment Experiences.
Environment and Behavior, 35(2), 176–190.
[33] Heerwagen, J., & Hase, B. (2001). The Value of Nature and the Nature of Value. In Kellert, S. R.,
Heerwagen, J. H., & Mador, M. L. (Eds.), Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of
Bringing Buildings to Life (pp. 5-19).
[34] Heerwagen, J. (2009). Biophilic design: Perspectives on nature in the built environment.
[35] Wiley. Joye, Y. (2007). Architectural Lessons from Environmental Psychology: The Case of Biophilic
Architecture. Review of General Psychology, 11(4), 305-328.

5829
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
[36] Kahn, P. H., Severson, R. L., & Ruckert, J. H. (2008). The Human Relation with Nature and
Technological Nature. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(4), 8–12
[37] Kandel, S., Walter, L., & Wahl, H. W. (2013). Impact of building design and outdoor greenness on well-
being in retirement homes: A pilot study. HortTechnology, 23(6), 796–802.
[38] Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge
University Press.
[39] Kaplan, S. (1995). The Restorative Benefits of Nature: Toward an Integrative Framework. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182.
[40] Kaplan, S. (1995). The Restorative Benefits of Nature: Toward an Integrative Framework. Journal of
EnvironmentalPsychology, 15(3), 169-182.
[41] Kellert, S. R. (2018). Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life.
Wiley.
[42] Kellert, S. R. (2005). Building for life: Designing and understanding the human-nature connection. Island
Press.
[43] Kellert, S. R., Heerwagen, J. H., & Mador, M. L. (Eds.). (2008). Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science,
and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. John Wiley & Sons
[44] Kopec, D. (2006). Environmental Psychology for Design. Fairchild Books.
[45] Kuo, F. E. (2001). Coping with Poverty: Impacts of Environment and Attention in the Inner City.
Environment and Behavior, 33(1), 5-34.
[46] Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Aggression and Violence in the Inner City: Effects of Environment
via Mental Fatigue. Environment and Behavior, 33(4), 543-571. Louv, R. (2005). Last Child in the
Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Algonquin Books.
[47] Madias, E. N. D., Christodoulou, K., Androvitsaneas, V. P., Skalkou, A., Sotiropoulou, S., Zervas, E., &
Doulos, L. T. (2023). Τhe effect of artificial lighting on both biophilic and human-centric design. Journal
of Building Engineering, 76, 107292.
[48] Madias, N., Kouloumpis, V., Kontoleon, K. J., & Kyriazis, A. (2023). Enhancing Indoor Environmental
Quality in Office Buildings: The Role of Natural Light. Building and Environment, 198, 107908.
[49] Maller, C., Townsend, M., Pryor, A., Brown, P., & St Leger, L. (2006). Healthy Nature Healthy People:
'Contact with Nature' as an Upstream Health Promotion Intervention for Populations. Health Promotion
International, 21(1), 45-54.
[50] Maslow, A. H. (1962). Toward a Psychology of Being. Van Nostrand
[51] McMahan, E. A., & Estes, D. (2015). The Effect of Contact with Natural Environments on Positive and
Negative Affect: A Meta-Analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(6), 507-519.
[52] McMichael, A. J. (2000). The Urban Environment and Health in a World of Increasing Globalization:
Issues for Developing Countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78(9), 1117-1126.
[53] Md Rian, I., & Sassone, M. (2014). The Role of Wood in Biophilic Design. In Creating the Productive
Workplace (pp. 113-120).
[54] Miyazaki, Y., & Okamoto, Y. (2006). Effects of Interior Design on Stress Response. Journal of
Physiological Anthropology, 25(6), 385-392.
[55] Nair, P. (2014). Health, Well-Being, and the Built Environment. In N. M. P. Gifford (Ed.), Research
Methods for Environmental Psychology (pp. 49-66).
[56] John Wiley & Sons.
[57] Nieminen, T., Martelin, T., Koskinen, S., Aro, H., Alanen, E., & Hyyppä, M. T. (2008). Social Capital
as a Determinant of Self-Rated Health and Psychological Well-Being. International Journal of Public
Health, 53(6), 322-332.
[58] Ojamaa, M. (2016). Exploring the Role of the Therapeutic Environment in the Rehabilitation Process.
Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools, & Early Intervention, 9(3), 270–283.
[59] Olmsted, F. L. (1993). The Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Grove of Big Trees: A Preliminary Report,
1865. In The National Parks: America's Best Idea (pp. 1–6). PBS.
[60] Park, B. J., Tsunetsugu, Y., Kasetani, T., Kagawa, T., & Miyazaki, Y. (2009). The physiological effects
of Shinrin-yoku (taking in the forest atmosphere or forest bathing): Evidence from field experiments in
24 forests across Japan. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 15(1), 18–26.

5830
Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology
ISSN: 1001-4055
Vol. 44 No. 6 (2023)
__________________________________________________________________________________
[61] Park, S.-A., Lee, B. K., & Lee, K. E. (2009). Comparative Analysis on Physiological and Psychological
Effects of Viewing Forest and Urban Landscapes. Korean Journal of Horticultural Science &
Technology, 27(6), 764–771.
[62] Peponis, J., Bafna, S., & Zhang, Z. T. (2007). The Space Syntax Method for the Analysis of Urban Open
Spaces. In S. Kvan, T. Kvan, P. H. W. Feijs, J. J. P. van Leeuwen, & H. Achten (Eds.), Design Computing
and Cognition '06 (pp. 63-82). Springer.
[63] Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Sellens, M., & Griffin, M. (2005). The Mental and Physical Health Outcomes of
Green Exercise. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 15(5), 319-337.
[64] Peters, R., & Verderber, S. (2022). Biophilic Design: Enhancing Well-being and Productivity in the
Workplace
[65] Roe, J. J., Thompson, C. W., Aspinall, P. A., Brewer, M. J., Duff, E. I., & Miller, D. (2013). Green Space
and Stress: Evidence from Cortisol Measures in Deprived Urban Communities. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(9), 4086-4103.
[66] Routledge. Ozdemir, S. (2010). The Role of Water in Biophilic Design: A Review. Buildings, 6(3),. In
Handbook of Environmental Psychology and Quality of Life Research (pp. 1-14). Springer.
[67] Ramzy, I. (2015a). Biophilic Design: The Solution to the Indoor Environment Quality and the Well-
being of Humans. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 28, 472-484.
[68] Ryan, R. L., Kaplan, R., & Grese, R. E. (2014). Nature-BasedI apologize, but I couldn't find any
references with the exact titles you provided
[69] Ryan, C., Browning, W. D., Clancy, J. O., & Andrews, S. (2014). Biophilic Design Patterns: Emerging
Nature-Based Parameters for Health and Well-Being in the Built Environment. International Journal of
Architectural Research, 8(2), 62–76
[70] Ryan, R. L., Kaplan, R., Grese, R. E., Grinde, B., & Velez, R. (2010). The Influence of Perceived and
Actual Landscape Complexity on Self-Reported Restorative Effects. Journal of Environmental.
[71] Sallis, J. F., Floyd, M. F., Rodríguez, D. A., & Saelens, B. E. (2012). Role of Built Environments in
Physical Activity, Obesity, and Cardiovascular Disease. Circulation, 125(5), 729-737.
[72] Soderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2015). Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and
outcomes. AIMS environmental science, 2(4), 950-969.
[73] Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of Experience: The Loss of Human-Nature Interactions.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(2), 94-101.
[74] Simarmata, A. (2023). The Creativity in the Design of Hospital Inpatient Rooms with Biophilic Criteria.
In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 426, p. 01087). EDP Sciences.
[75] Stigsdotter, U. K., Corazon, S. S., Sidenius, U., Kristiansen, J., Grahn, P., & Skov-Petersen, H. (2017).
Health-Promoting Outdoor Environments—Associations between Green Space, and Health, Health-
Related Quality of Life and Stress Based on a Danish National Representative Survey. Scandinavian
Journal of Public Health, 45(4), 411-418.
[76] Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery. Science,
224(4647), 420-421.
[77] Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery. Science,
224(4647), 420–421.
[78] Ulrich, R. S. (1991). Effects of Interior Design on Wellness: Theory and Recent Scientific Research.
Journal of Health Care Interior Design, 3(1), 97–109.
[79] Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress Recovery
During Exposure to Natural and Urban Environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201–
230.
[80] Wells, N. M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Nearby Nature: A Buffer of Life Stress Among Rural Children.
Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 311–330.
[81] White, M. P., Alcock, I., Grellier, J., Wheeler, B. W., Hartig, T., Warber, S. L., Bone, A., Depledge, M.
H., & Fleming, L. E. (2019). Spending at Least 120 Minutes a Week in Nature Is Associated with Good
Health and Wellbeing. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 7730.
[82] WHO Regional Office for Europe. (2016). Urban Green Spaces and Health: A Review of Evidence.
World Health Organization.

5831