Next Article in Journal
Carbon Price Forecasting and Market Characteristics Analysis in China: An Integrated Approach Using Overall and Market-Specific Models
Previous Article in Journal
Identifying and Assessing Vulnerable Micro-Enterprises in Lithuania
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 17
Issue 12
10.3390/su17125406
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Nature Exposure and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Roles of Connectedness to Nature and Awe

by
Meihui Zhou
1,2,
Ying Luo
2,
Zihan Xu
2,
Ronghua Zhang
2,3,* and
Xiaoliang Liu
3,*
1
Laboratoire de Psychologie et d’Ergonomie Appliquées, Université Gustave Eiffel, Université de Paris, 25 Allée des Marronniers, 78000 Versailles, France
2
Institute of Developmental and Educational Psychology, School of Marxism, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
3
Department of Ideological and Political Education, School of Marxism, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2025, 17(12), 5406; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125406
Submission received: 15 April 2025 / Revised: 12 May 2025 / Accepted: 8 June 2025 / Published: 11 June 2025
(This article belongs to the Topic Global Mental Health Trends)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Nature exposure has been linked to enhanced subjective well-being; however, the underlying psychological mechanisms of this phenomenon remain underexplored. This study explores the mediating roles of connectedness to nature and awe in the relationship between nature exposure and subjective well-being. A sample of 301 high-school students (age = 17.09 ± 0.77) in China was examined via a questionnaire study. The findings indicate that connectedness to nature and awe significantly mediate the relationship between nature exposure and subjective well-being, with a positive correlation between these variables. Specifically, higher levels of nature exposure are associated with greater connectedness to nature and more profound experiences of awe, which, in turn, are linked to increased subjective well-being. These results underscore the important roles of connectedness to nature and the experience of awe in feeling subjective well-being in nature.

1. Introduction

Humans experience both physical and mental benefits from engaging with natural settings [1]. The term nature exposure encompasses interactions with physical natural elements such as trees, lakes, mountains, and animals, as well as engagement with virtual representations such as nature videos and photographs [2]. Extensive research supports a positive association between contact with nature and subjective well-being [3,4,5].
Given the widespread application of nature-based interventions for their restorative health benefits, particularly in urban areas where natural environments are scarce [6], it is crucial to explore the psychological mechanisms that underlie these positive effects. Nature’s role in inducing feelings of awe and awe’s benefits on well-being are critical aspects to consider [7]. This study aims to empirically validate a mediation model that elucidates the process by which contact with nature is positively related to subjective well-being through nature connectedness and awe.

1.1. Nature Exposure and Well-Being

Nature exposure here refers to interactions with physical natural elements and also to virtual representations of nature, including pictures, videos, VR experience, etc. [2]. Some studies have demonstrated that interacting with nature enhances well-being. Specifically, exposure to nature can lead to reduced stress levels [8,9], increased vitality [10], and a decrease in symptoms of depression and anxiety [11,12,13]. Additionally, it can foster increased positive affect [7,14]. This research concentrates on nature’s impact on subjective well-being, defined here as the combination of pleasant emotional experiences, overall life satisfaction, and positive affect [15].
The advantages of nature exposure extend beyond mental health, also encompassing physical benefits such as lower blood pressure [12,16], improved sleep quality [17], and enhanced immune function [18]. For example, one study of 19,806 participants explored the relationship between recent nature contact and self-reported health and well-being [19]. The findings indicated that individuals who had interacted with nature for at least 120 min in the past week were more likely to report good health and high levels of well-being compared to those with no recent nature contact.
Several theories have been proposed regarding the impact of nature contact on well-being. For example, the biophilia hypothesis, introduced by Wilson, posits that humans have an inherent, evolutionary-driven affinity towards nature, a result of millions of years of co-evolution [20]. This natural inclination persists even in urban environments, where people demonstrate a preference for natural settings. The Attention Restoration Theory (ART), developed by Kaplan and Kaplan [21], expands upon this evolutionary perspective. ART suggests that natural environments, filled with ‘soft fascinations’ such as clouds, sunsets, and rustling leaves, facilitate effortless attention, thereby allowing the mind’s inhibitory capacity to recover and rejuvenate directed attention. Additionally, the Stress Reduction Theory (SRT), formulated by Ulrich [22], underscores the role of calmness and relaxation in nature’s influence. SRT focuses on recovering from psychophysiological stress through nature, in contrast with ART’s cognitive approach. Ulrich argued that modern humans are biologically predisposed to find restoration in natural settings, which can trigger feelings of interest, pleasantness, and calm without conscious judgment, thereby alleviating emotional, attentional, and physiological stress.

1.2. Connectedness to Nature and Well-Being

Connectedness to nature(CN) refers to individual’s emotional sense of oneness with nature and belonging to the natural world [1]. This concept aligns with the biophilia hypothesis, which posits an innate human need for affiliation with the broader natural environment [20,23]. Consequently, when individuals engage with nature, fulfilling this need for belonging, they experience psychological benefits [10,24].
Recent studies have consistently shown that connectedness to nature is a strong predictor of well-being. For example, these findings are consistent across 34 different samples from various regions including Canada, Europe, the USA, Australia, India, Colombia, and Hong Kong [25]. A across-cultural study discovered that CN is positively associated with both subjective well-being and eudaimonic well-being [3]. Furthermore, a mediation analysis revealed that connectedness to nature serves as a mediator in the positive relationship between nature exposure and various aspects of well-being.
It was found that, among a sample of 4960 adults in England, frequent visits to natural environments (more than once a week) and a sense of connectedness to nature were positively associated with general health [26]. Additionally, connectedness to nature showed a positive correlation with evaluative well-being and eudaimonic well-being. These results align with findings by Mayer [1], which indicated that positive outcomes from nature exposure, such as enhanced attentional capacity, increased positive emotions, and improved problem-solving reflective capacity, were partially mediated by a sense of connectedness to nature.
Another study demonstrated that connectedness to nature positively correlates with awe as one elevating feeling [3]. More specifically, CN is significantly associated with positive affect, with elevating experiences, and with a sense of meaning. In the present research, we propose that connectedness to nature facilitates awe, thereby acting as a mediator.

1.3. Awe and Well-Being

Awe, considered a positive emotion, is typically evoked during encounters with nature [27,28,29]. It represents an emotional response to exceptionally vast stimuli that surpass the boundaries of one’s existing cognitive schemas and cognitive accommodation [30]. Awe can be elicited by various stimuli, such as grand buildings and simple equations; the prototypical awe experience involves encounters with natural phenomena. These phenomena are distinguished by their immense size, scope, or intricacy, including galaxies, vast skies, or the boundless ocean [29,31]. Furthermore, research indicates that even imagined interactions with nature can prompt deep awe and a sense of connection, as well as the feeling of being in the presence of something larger than oneself [32].
Experiencing awe has been linked to enhanced subjective well-being. A study conducted by Rudd found that participants who read an awe-inspiring story reported increased life satisfaction [33]. It was found that awe experienced during whitewater rafting predicted better well-being and reduced stress symptoms a week later, with awe mediating the positive effects of nature experiences on well-being [34]. A longitudinal study conducted during COVID-19 revealed that frequent experiences of awe correlated with lower stress and higher positive affect and well-being, suggesting awe can be a strong driver of human flourishing [35].
Awe fosters a sense of belonging to a larger collective, promoting connections to both community and nature. Individuals with high dispositional awe often identified themselves as “a person” or “an inhabitant of the Earth” [29]. Viewing nature videos could enhance community connectedness and elicited awe [36]. Exposure to towering trees prompted feelings of humility and the recognition of something greater than oneself, along with awe [31]. In line with Mayer’s definition of connectedness to nature (CN), there appears to be an intrinsic link between CN and awe, as both entail perceiving oneself as part of a broader system. Interactions with nature can stimulate both awe and CN [7]. However, the interrelationship among connectedness to nature, awe, and well-being remains relatively unexplored.

1.4. Awe as a Mediator of the Influence of CN on Subjective Well-Being

Previous research has shown that ‘meaning in life’ and spirituality can serve as mediators in the relationship between connectedness to nature (CN) and well-being [37,38]. For instance, it was demonstrated spirituality significantly mediated the relationship between connectedness to nature and well-being [38]. This phenomenon can be understood through the theory of ecopsychology, which posits that an individual’s ‘ecological self’ evolves via biophysical and spiritual interconnectedness with nature [39]. This development alters self-perception from an ‘I’-dominant view to a more expansive, field-like sense of self that encompasses all life forms, ecosystems, and the Earth [20]. Such a broad ‘ecological self’ perception is positively correlated with well-being.
Furthermore, within the framework of positive psychology, spirituality is recognized as one of the 24 character strengths emphasized by Seligman [40]. Along with spirituality, awe—categorized under the appreciation of beauty and excellence—is also classified as part of the virtue of transcendence. Individuals high in this virtue tend to experience greater meaning in life and can transcend their current context, especially in natural settings. Engaging in the virtue of transcendence and the character strengths of awe and spirituality has been found to significantly predict subjective well-being [41]. Therefore, akin to spirituality, awe could serve as a mediator in the relationship between CN and subjective well-being.
The exploration of connectedness to nature (CN) and awe as mediators in the relationship between nature and well-being is limited. This gap in research might stem from the fact that CN is primarily discussed within environmental psychology, whereas awe is more frequently addressed in social psychology and positive psychology. For example, one study investigated the impact of awe on ecological behavior [42], identifying CN as a mediating factor. The findings indicated that participants experiencing awe engaged more in ecological behaviors than those in the control group, with CN mediating this effect. In contrast, another study found that positive awe of nature enhanced well-being by increasing CN [28]. Threatening awe, however, can induce feelings of powerlessness and did not significantly affect well-being. Additionally, an experimental study revealed that learning about knowledge of nature fostered awe, which subsequently enhanced CN [43].
Building on these foundations, this research aims to delve deeper into the nature exposure–well-being nexus and proposes a nuanced understanding of how CN and awe interact within this dynamic. We hypothesize a divergent role for CN and awe in mediating the effects of nature exposure on well-being.

1.5. Current Research

Consistent with prior research, nature exposure can enhance one’s connectedness to nature, fostering a profound affiliation with the broader natural ecosystem [3,44,45]. Such engagement creates ideal conditions for fostering awe by inducing feelings of interconnectedness and self-diminishment. In this study, we focus on the pivotal role of awe in enhancing subjective well-being, with connectedness to nature serving to promote well-being through the amplification of awe.
Grounded in the empirical evidence as discussed, we hypothesized a chain mediation model (as shown in Figure 1) to explore the underlying mechanisms linking nature exposure and subjective well-being. This research aims to confirm several aspects: (1) nature exposure has a positive impact on subjective well-being; (2) connectedness to nature acts as an independent mediator between nature exposure and subjective well-being; (3) awe functions as an independent mediator in the same relationship; and (4) connectedness to nature and awe together serve as sequential mediators between nature exposure and subjective well-being. To sum up, the objective of this study is to elucidate the degree to which nature exposure influences subjective well-being, specifically considering the roles of both connectedness to nature and awe in this dynamic.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Procedure

This study analyzed data from 301 high school students in China, including 108 females and 193 males. Participants ranged in age from 15 to 20 years, with a mean age of 17.09 years (SD = 0.77). The participants were recruited face-to-face in computer classrooms, ensuring controlled measurement conditions. All data collection procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee of the university, and participation was anonymous and voluntary. Of the participants, 236 (78.4%) were from rural backgrounds, and 65 (21.6%) came from urban settings. Regarding their knowledge of nature, 42 students reported having moderate to high knowledge. Additionally, 28.2% of the students indicated that biology was one of their favorite subjects.

2.2. Materials

2.2.1. Nature Exposure

Nature exposure was measured with three items reporting one’s level of engagement with the natural environment in daily life. These items included the proximity of parks, grasslands, or other relaxing places to one’s living area [46], the frequency of intentional engagement with the natural environment, and the number of hours per week intentionally spent in nature [12]. Each item was assessed using a 4-point Likert scale. Higher scores on the scale indicate higher levels of exposure to nature.

2.2.2. Connectedness to Nature

Connectedness to nature was registered with the Connectedness to Nature Scale (CNS) developed by Mayer and Frantz [47]. The Chinese version of this scale was employed, which comprises 14 items that participants rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) [48]. This scale tests an individual’s trait level of feeling emotionally connected to the natural world. Previous studies have demonstrated the scale’s strong reliability and validity, particularly among Chinese college students [48]. Items such as “I feel deeply aware of how my actions affect the natural world” were used. In the present study, Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale was 0.83.

2.2.3. Inclusion of Nature in Self

Additionally, the Inclusion of Nature in Self (INS) scale, developed by Schultz [49], was employed to further assess the nature–human connection. This scale quantifies the degree to which an individual integrates nature into their cognitive self-concept. It consists of a single item, requiring participants to select an image that most accurately represents their relationship with the natural environment and their sense of interconnection with nature. The item reads: “Please circle the picture that best describes your relationship with the natural environment. How interconnected are you with nature?” Scores ranged from 1 (where the circles touched but did not overlap) to 7 (where the circles were nearly entirely overlapping), reflecting a deeper sense of unity with nature [49].

2.2.4. Awe

The measurement of awe in this study was conducted using the awe subscale from the Dispositional Positive Emotion Scales (DPES) developed by Shiota [30]. Participants rated the answers on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = “strongly disagree”, 7 = “strongly agree”), with the total score calculated from the items. Higher scores indicate greater levels of awe experienced by the participants. Items such as “I felt the presence of something greater than myself” were used. In this study, Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale was 0.85.

2.2.5. Subjective Well-Being

Subjective well-being was assessed using the Index of Well-Being (IWB) developed by Campbell [50], which is designed to assess levels of subjective well-being. The IWB is composed of two key components: the General Affect Index, containing eight items, and the Life Satisfaction Index, consisting of a single item. Calculating the subjective well-being score involves assigning a weight of 1 to the average of the eight items in the General Affect Index and a weight of 1.1 to the single item in the Life Satisfaction Index. The combination of these two components yields the overall subjective well-being score. This measurement approach has been validated and shown to possess strong reliability in Chinese contexts [51]. For this study, participants rated the items on a seven-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 2.1, indicating the lowest level of well-being, to 14.7, denoting the highest level of well-being. Thus, higher scores indicate higher levels of subjective well-being. In this study, Cronbach’s α coefficient for the IWB was 0.95.

2.2.6. Nature Knowledge

To evaluate participants’ self-perceived level of knowledge about nature, a single self-report item was utilized: “To what extent do you perceive yourself as having a rich understanding of nature?” Participants rated their level of agreement with this statement using a 5-point Likert scale. On this scale, 1 represents “strongly disagree” and 5 denotes “strongly agree.” This approach allowed participants to self-assess their perceived expertise or familiarity with natural environments and concepts.
Participants also provided their demographic information, including their gender and age, in the questionnaire.

3. Results

3.1. Common Method Bias Test

Common method bias is a systematic error in index data results that occurs due to the use of the same data acquisition method or the measurement environment. To assess the presence of this bias in this study, the Harman single-factor test was employed. A significant common method bias is suggested if the first factor in the test explains more than 40% of the variance [52]. In the present research, the variance explained by the first factor was only 17.85%, which is well below this threshold. Consequently, it can be deduced that the results of this questionnaire are minimally impacted by common method bias.

3.2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics and correlation analysis, showing the means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients of the variables of Inclusion with nature in self (INS), connectedness to nature (CN), awe, subjective well-being (SWB), and nature exposure (NE).
Participants in this study reported a moderately high sense of connectedness to nature (M = 3.63). The data revealed a positive association between nature exposure and subjective well-being (r = 0.19). Additionally, nature exposure and subjective well-being (SWB) were found to be positively related to connectedness to nature (CN), inclusion of nature in self (INS), and awe. Furthermore, CN, INS, and awe demonstrated positive correlations with one another.
The significant relationships between the variables highlight the potential for developing a mediation model to further explore and understand these interconnections.

3.3. Mediating Analysis

Preacher and Hayes’ bootstrap method was used to test mediation, employing the SPSS23 macro PROCESS (Model 6) developed by Hayes [53]. The deviation-corrected Bootstrap method (with sampling repeated 5000 times) was used to test the mediating effects of connectedness to nature (CN) and awe between nature exposure and subjective well-being (SWB). Simultaneously, we tested an alternative model, created by replacing the “connectedness to nature” score with the “inclusion of nature in self” (INS) score. This dual approach allowed for a comprehensive analysis of the relationships and potential mediation effects within the dataset.
In the mediation model, two covariates were incorporated: gender and knowledge of nature. Analyzing the first model, which included CN, revealed that the total effect of NE on SWB is 0.20. Additionally, the total indirect effect of CN and awe in the relationship between nature exposure and SWB is 0.17 (as detailed in Table 2). More specifically, the mediating effect included the following three pathways: (1) nature exposure → connectedness to nature → subjective well-being (0.06), (2) nature exposure → awe → subjective well-being (0.05), and (3) nature exposure → connectedness to nature → awe → subjective well-being (0.06). See Table 2. The proportions of these three indirect effects to the total indirect effect are 34%, 30%, and 36%, respectively. Notably, the 95% confidence interval for these three indirect effects did not include zero, underscoring their statistical significance. The direct effect of nature exposure on SWB was not statistically significant, suggesting that CN and awe fully mediate the relationship between NE and SWB. More details regarding the mediation model are illustrated in Figure 2.
After substituting “connectedness to nature” with “inclusion with nature in self” (INS) in the mediation model, we observed that the overall impact of nature exposure (NE) on subjective well-being (SWB) remained consistent at 0.20, as in the previous model. This robust consistency strongly supports the validity of the mediating model. In this modified model, the total indirect effect, now influenced by INS and awe, was 0.19 (as detailed in Table 3). It is worth noting that the mediating effect encompasses two pathways: (1) nature exposure → awe → subjective well-being (0.11), and (2) nature exposure → inclusion with nature in self → awe → subjective well-being (0.04). The respective proportions of these indirect effects to the total effect are 58% and 21%. As was the case with the previous model, the direct effect of NE on SWB is not statistically significant. More details on the mediating effect are shown in Figure 3.

4. Discussion

The present study aimed to determine the extent to which nature exposure (NE) influences subjective well-being (SWB), and to elucidate the roles of connectedness to nature (CN) and awe within this relationship. Significant positive correlations were observed amongst all examined variables.
The findings indicated that higher levels of nature exposure were correlated with increased scores in both CN and awe. In addition to this, the analysis encompassed the examination of two mediation models, one incorporating CN and the other including the inclusion of nature in self (INS) as mediator variables. Both models effectively demonstrated that CN (or INS) and awe mediated the impact of NE on SWB. These results underscore the significant impact that cognitive and emotional engagement with nature has on enhancing SWB, reinforcing the notion that nature-related experiences, which boost CN and instill awe, are integral to improved subjective well-being [1,3,29].
This research found that a stronger orientation towards awe was positively correlated with higher levels of nature exposure (NE) and connectedness to nature (CN). Previous studies have acknowledged that nature acts as a source of and context for experiencing awe [27,29,54], but they have not thoroughly investigated the mechanisms linking awe to CN. Diverging from recent research [42,43], this study’s findings indicate that nature exposure not only directly induces awe but also indirectly enhances it through increasing connectedness to nature.
Belonging and connection are fundamental human needs [55]. Nature exposure facilitates this need by enabling individuals to connect with the broader natural environment, aligning with the biophilia hypothesis [23]. This connection explains the observed positive relationships between nature exposure, connectedness to nature, and subjective well-being (SWB). Individuals with higher nature connectedness could easily feel a deep sense of oneness with the natural world, a sense of kinship with animals and plants, and a perception of equality with nature [47]. The experience of connectedness to a larger system often brings about feelings of insignificance, thereby elucidating why CN is positively linked to awe.
As a self-transcendent emotion, awe can evoke a sense of self-diminishment. As individuals immerse themselves in nature, their connectedness to nature intensifies, leading them to perceive their own insignificance and view themselves as humble components of a larger ecosystem [47,56]. This reduced self-focus facilitates a stronger sense of belonging within the broader natural world, encompassing not only human communities but also other living beings such as plants and animals [32]. Therefore, connectedness to nature (CN) is likely to induce awe, which is characterized by perceptions of vastness and cognitive accommodation [29]. In mainstream social psychology, the need to belong to human groups, to feel connected to others and to be recognized as a valued member of a community has been highlighted as a basic human need [57]. From an environmental psychology perspective, it has been argued that this sense of belonging extends beyond urban boundaries and includes connection with the natural world [58]. This suggests that fulfilling the need for belonging through a connection with nature can result in psychological benefits.
It is also important to acknowledge that some individuals may view the natural environment as a means of escaping from the human community. Thus, higher levels of nature connectedness may not always reflect stronger integration into human society, but rather a form of psychological withdrawal or detachment [59,60]. Moreover, individuals with high levels of connectedness to nature and experiences of awe may perceive human activity as exploitative or destructive, potentially weakening their sense of belonging to human communities. Future research should further investigate the directionality and contextual moderators of the relationship between CN and human community belonging, as well as differentiating between affiliative and critical forms of reduced self-focus.
In accordance with previous research [6,28,37], the present study found that a stronger orientation towards CN and awe predicted enhanced SWB. The results substantiated that CN and awe significantly mediate the relationship between nature exposure and SWB. Therefore, these findings suggest that the pathways through which the positive effects of nature exposure are derived include both CN and the connection between CN and awe. Consequently, these findings indicate that the beneficial effects of nature exposure on SWB are conveyed through both the direct effect of CN and the interplay between CN and awe.
This research incorporated knowledge of nature and gender as covariables. CN is known to encompass both affective and cognitive dimensions, as demonstrated in prior research [47,49]. Knowledge of nature, in particular, can significantly influence an individual’s perception of the environment, their relationship with it, and their understanding of the vastness of living systems. Recent studies have confirmed a positive link between acquiring knowledge about nature and increased connectedness to nature [61,62,63,64]. The findings remained statistically significant even after controlling for the effects of nature knowledge and gender. This robustness underscores the reliability of the mediation model employed in this study.
There are some limitations with this research. First, this is a cross-sectional study and it cannot make causality-related inferences. To address this, future research could adopt experimental methodologies or longitudinal studies to more definitively establish causal links among the variables of nature exposure, connectedness to nature, awe, and subjective well-being. Second, the assessment of nature exposure in the study was based on three self-reported items. Future studies could benefit from developing a more detailed and comprehensive assessment that captures a broader range of experiences and aspects of nature exposure. Such an instrument would allow for a more nuanced evaluation of the overall impact of nature exposure. Third, the sample in the present study consisted of high-school students. Therefore, caution should be exercised when generalizing the findings to individuals of different age groups. Adolescents are in a developmental phase characterized by heightened self-focus, ongoing identity formation [65], and increased exposure to digital media—all of which may influence how they engage with and relate to nature. Young people may be particularly vulnerable to issues such as low self-esteem, excessive screen time, and a sense of disconnection from the physical natural world, which can make nature-based experiences especially salient and potentially restorative.
Although previous research has reported similar psychological benefits of nature experience in adult populations [6,19], the ways in which individuals relate to nature are likely to evolve with age. The concept of the “ecological self,” for instance, may manifest differently during adolescence compared to later life stages, where feelings of spirituality, transcendence, and long-term environmental concern tend to be more fully developed. Thus, the findings of the present study should be interpreted within the specific developmental context of youth and with caution when considering their applicability to older age groups. Future research could explore age-related differences in connectedness to nature and its psychological outcomes, potentially integrating insights from developmental and lifespan psychology.
Future research could also explore the impact of nature on creativity, given its potential to enhance positive affect and restore directed attention, both of which are crucial for creative endeavors. Previous studies have shown that natural views and indoor plants can stimulate creative thinking in educational settings [66] and promote curiosity, idea generation, and flexible thinking during the preparation and incubation phases of creative processes [67].
Despite its limitations, this study provides some insights into the positive impact of nature exposure on subjective well-being, as well as the mediating roles of connectedness to nature and awe within this process. Consequently, it advocates for more frequent engagement with nature in daily life. Overlooking the influence of nature on well-being may result in lost opportunities to foster positive mental health and strengthen our connection to the natural world [68]. This study also highlights the importance of feeling a sense of connectedness to nature and experiencing awe in nature. Strategies for immersing oneself in the natural environment are recommended, including joining outdoor educational activities, practicing mindfulness to enhance one’s appreciation of natural beauty, intentionally spending more time in nature, and participating in gardening-related activities [5,37,51,69].

5. Conclusions

The current findings demonstrate that contact with nature is positively associated with increased connectedness to nature, heightened experiences of awe, and improved subjective well-being. Furthermore, this research explored the underlying mechanism explaining why nature is beneficial for mental health. Specifically, the findings suggest that connectedness to nature and experiences of awe act as crucial mediators in the positive relationship between nature exposure and well-being. More specifically, it is advisable to deliberately choose settings that can evoke a sense of awe towards nature and life, as well as engaging in activities that foster a feeling of connectedness with the natural world. Such intentional immersion in nature not only enriches the experience but also serves as an effective strategy for bolstering overall well-being. This approach aligns with the understanding that direct and profound interactions with nature are instrumental in enhancing mental health and emotional wellness.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.Z. and M.Z.; methodology, M.Z.; data collection and analysis, M.Z., Y.L. and Z.X.; writing—original draft preparation, M.Z.; writing—review and editing, R.Z. and M.Z.; supervision, R.Z. and X.L.; project administration, R.Z. and X.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Social Science Found of China (Grant No. 24BKS139).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Wuhan University (WHU-HSS-IRB2025044) on 4 June 2025.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in both studies before participating.

Data Availability Statement

Due to privacy, the datasets involved in this study are not publicly available but are available from the author Meihui Zhou on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We thank all the participants who took part in our survey and all the research assistants for data collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Mayer, F.S.; Frantz, C.M.; Bruehlman-Senecal, E.; Dolliver, K. Why Is Nature Beneficial?: The Role of Connectedness to Nature. Environ. Behav. 2009, 41, 607–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kaplan, S. The Restorative Benefits of Nature: Toward an Integrative Framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 1995, 15, 169–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Capaldi, C.A.; Passmore, H.-A.; Ishii, R.; Chistopolskaya, K.A.; Vowinckel, J.; Nikolaev, E.L.; Semikin, G.I. Engaging with Natural Beauty May Be Related to Well-Being Because It Connects People to Nature: Evidence from Three Cultures. Ecopsychology 2017, 9, 199–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Korpela, K.; Borodulin, K.; Neuvonen, M.; Paronen, O.; Tyrväinen, L. Analyzing the Mediators between Nature-Based Outdoor Recreation and Emotional Well-Being. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 37, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Richardson, M.; Hamlin, I.; Butler, C.W.; Thomas, R.; Hunt, A. Actively Noticing Nature (Not Just Time in Nature) Helps Promote Nature Connectedness. Ecopsychology 2022, 14, 8–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Capaldi, C.; Passmore, H.-A.; Nisbet, E.; Zelenski, J.; Dopko, R. Flourishing in Nature: A Review of the Benefits of Connecting with Nature and Its Application as a Wellbeing Intervention. Int. J. Wellbeing 2015, 5, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ballew, M.T.; Omoto, A.M. Absorption: How Nature Experiences Promote Awe and Other Positive Emotions. Ecopsychology 2018, 10, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Berto, R. The Role of Nature in Coping with Psycho-Physiological Stress: A Literature Review on Restorativeness. Behav. Sci. 2014, 4, 394–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Van Den Berg, A.E.; Hartig, T.; Staats, H. Preference for Nature in Urbanized Societies: Stress, Restoration, and the Pursuit of Sustainability. J. Soc. Issues 2007, 63, 79–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ryan, R.M.; Weinstein, N.; Bernstein, J.; Brown, K.W.; Mistretta, L.; Gagné, M. Vitalizing Effects of Being Outdoors and in Nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bratman, G.N.; Hamilton, J.P.; Daily, G.C. The Impacts of Nature Experience on Human Cognitive Function and Mental Health. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2012, 1249, 118–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Shanahan, D.F.; Fuller, R.A.; Bush, R.; Lin, B.B.; Gaston, K.J. The Health Benefits of Urban Nature: How Much Do We Need? BioScience 2015, 65, 476–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. White, M.P. Natural Environments and Subjective Wellbeing_ Different Types of Exposure Are Associated with Different Aspects of Wellbeing. Health Place 2017, 45, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. McMahan, E.A.; Estes, D. The Effect of Contact with Natural Environments on Positive and Negative Affect: A Meta-Analysis. J. Posit. Psychol. 2015, 10, 507–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Diener, E. Subjective Well-Being. Psychol. Bull. 1984, 95, 542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Markevych, I.; Schoierer, J.; Hartig, T.; Chudnovsky, A.; Hystad, P.; Dzhambov, A.M.; De Vries, S.; Triguero-Mas, M.; Brauer, M.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. Exploring Pathways Linking Greenspace to Health: Theoretical and Methodological Guidance. Environ. Res. 2017, 158, 301–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Grigsby-Toussaint, D.S.; Turi, K.N.; Krupa, M.; Williams, N.J.; Pandi-Perumal, S.R.; Jean-Louis, G. Sleep Insufficiency and the Natural Environment: Results from the US Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey. Prev. Med. 2015, 78, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Li, Q.; Kawada, T. Effect of Forest Environments on Human Natural Killer (NK) Activity. Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 2011, 24, 39S–44S. [Google Scholar]
  19. White, M.P.; Alcock, I.; Grellier, J.; Wheeler, B.W.; Hartig, T.; Warber, S.L.; Bone, A.; Depledge, M.H.; Fleming, L.E. Spending at Least 120 Minutes a Week in Nature Is Associated with Good Health and Wellbeing. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 7730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wilson, E.O. Biophilia; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kaplan, R.; Kaplan, S. A Psychological Perspective; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  22. Ulrich, R.S.; Simons, R.F.; Losito, B.D.; Fiorito, E.; Miles, M.A.; Zelson, M. Stress Recovery during Exposure to Natural and Urban Environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 1991, 11, 201–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kellert, S.R.; Wilson, E.O. The Biophilia Hypothesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Pritchard, A.; Richardson, M.; Sheffield, D.; McEwan, K. The Relationship Between Nature Connectedness and Eudaimonic Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis. J. Happiness Stud. 2020, 21, 1145–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Martin, L.; White, M.P.; Hunt, A.; Richardson, M.; Pahl, S.; Burt, J. Nature Contact, Nature Connectedness and Associations with Health, Wellbeing and pro-Environmental Behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 68, 101389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Keltner, D.; Haidt, J. Approaching Awe, a Moral, Spiritual, and Aesthetic Emotion. Cogn. Emot. 2003, 17, 297–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liu, J.; Huo, Y.; Wang, J.; Bai, Y.; Zhao, M.; Di, M. Awe of Nature and Well-Being: Roles of Nature Connectedness and Powerlessness. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2023, 201, 111946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shiota, M.N.; Keltner, D.; Mossman, A. The Nature of Awe: Elicitors, Appraisals, and Effects on Self-Concept. Cogn. Emot. 2007, 21, 944–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Shiota, M.N.; Keltner, D.; John, O.P. Positive Emotion Dispositions Differentially Associated with Big Five Personality and Attachment Style. J. Posit. Psychol. 2006, 1, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Piff, P.K.; Feinberg, M.; Dietze, P.; Stancato, D.M.; Keltner, D. Awe, the Small Self, and Prosocial Behavior. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2015, 108, 883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Seo, M.; Yang, S.; Laurent, S.M. No One Is an Island: Awe Encourages Global Citizenship Identification. Emotion 2023, 23, 601–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Rudd, M.; Vohs, K.D.; Aaker, J. Awe Expands People’s Perception of Time, Alters Decision Making, and Enhances Well-Being. Psychol. Sci. 2012, 23, 1130–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Anderson, C.L.; Monroy, M.; Keltner, D. Awe in Nature Heals: Evidence from Military Veterans, at-Risk Youth, and College Students. Emotion 2018, 18, 1195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Monroy, M.; Uğurlu, Ö.; Zerwas, F.; Corona, R.; Keltner, D.; Eagle, J.; Amster, M. The Influences of Daily Experiences of Awe on Stress, Somatic Health, and Well-Being: A Longitudinal Study during COVID-19. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 9336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Aron, A.; Aron, E.N.; Smollan, D. Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the Structure of Interpersonal Closeness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1992, 63, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Howell, A.J.; Dopko, R.L.; Passmore, H.-A.; Buro, K. Nature Connectedness: Associations with Well-Being and Mindfulness. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2011, 51, 166–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kamitsis, I.; Francis, A.J.P. Spirituality Mediates the Relationship between Engagement with Nature and Psychological Wellbeing. J. Environ. Psychol. 2013, 36, 136–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bragg, E.A. Towards Ecological Self: Deep Ecology Meets Constructionist Self-Theory. J. Environ. Psychol. 1996, 16, 93–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Peterson, C.; Seligman, M.E.P. Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; ISBN 978-0-19-516701-6. [Google Scholar]
  41. Seligman, M.E.P. Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002; ISBN 978-0-7432-2297-6. [Google Scholar]
  42. Yang, Y.; Hu, J.; Jing, F.; Nguyen, B. From Awe to Ecological Behavior: The Mediating Role of Connectedness to Nature. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ng, S.T.; Leung, A.K.-Y.; Chan, S.H.M. Through the Lens of a Naturalist: How Learning about Nature Promotes Nature Connectedness via Awe. J. Environ. Psychol. 2023, 92, 102069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Samus, A.; Freeman, C.; Van Heezik, Y.; Krumme, K.; Dickinson, K.J. How Do Urban Green Spaces Increase Well-Being? The Role of Perceived Wildness and Nature Connectedness. J. Environ. Psychol. 2022, 82, 101850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wolsko, C.; Lindberg, K. Experiencing Connection with Nature: The Matrix of Psychological Well-Being, Mindfulness, and Outdoor Recreation. Ecopsychology 2013, 5, 80–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. De Vries, S.; Verheij, R.A.; Groenewegen, P.P.; Spreeuwenberg, P. Natural Environments—Healthy Environments? An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship between Greenspace and Health. Environ. Plan. Econ. Space 2003, 35, 1717–1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mayer, F.S.; Frantz, C.M. The Connectedness to Nature Scale: A Measure of Individuals’ Feeling in Community with Nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 2004, 24, 503–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Na, L.; Jianping, W.; Psychology, D.O. Revise of the Connectedness to Nature Scale and Its Reliability and Validity. China J. Health Psychol. 2016, 24, 1347–1350. [Google Scholar]
  49. Schultz, P.W. Inclusion with Nature: The Psychology of Human-Nature Relations. In Psychology of Sustainable Development; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2002; pp. 61–78. [Google Scholar]
  50. Campbell, A. Subjective Measures of Well-Being. Am. Psychol. 1976, 31, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Siman, L.; Keting, L.; Tiantian, L.; Li, L. The Impact of Mindfulness on Subjective Well-Being of College Students: The Mediating Effects of Emotion Regulation and Resilience. J. Psychol. Sci. 2015, 38, 889. [Google Scholar]
  52. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in Simple Mediation Models. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 2004, 36, 717–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Joye, Y.; Bolderdijk, J.W. An Exploratory Study into the Effects of Extraordinary Nature on Emotions, Mood, and Prosociality. Front. Psychol. 2015, 5, 1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Fiske, S.T. Social Beings: Core Motives in Social Psychology; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; ISBN 1-119-49273-4. [Google Scholar]
  56. Leopold, A. A Sand County Almanac: With Essays on Conservation from Round River; Ballantine Books: New York, NY, USA, 1986; ISBN 0-345-34505-3. [Google Scholar]
  57. Diener, E.; Ryan, K. Subjective Well-Being: A General Overview. South Afr. J. Psychol. 2009, 39, 391–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Roszak, T.E.; Gomes, M.E.; Kanner, A.D. Ecopsychology: Restoring the Earth, Healing the Mind.; Sierra Club Books: Oakland, CA, USA, 1995; ISBN 0-87156-499-8. [Google Scholar]
  59. Sonnentag, S.; Binnewies, C.; Mojza, E.J. Staying Well and Engaged When Demands Are High: The Role of Psychological Detachment. J. Appl. Psychol. 2010, 95, 965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. De Bloom, J.; Kinnunen, U.; Korpela, K. Exposure to Nature versus Relaxation during Lunch Breaks and Recovery from Work: Development and Design of an Intervention Study to Improve Workers’ Health, Well-Being, Work Performance and Creativity. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Frantz, C.M.; Mayer, F.S. The Importance of Connection to Nature in Assessing Environmental Education Programs. Stud. Educ. Eval. 2014, 41, 85–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kossack, A.; Bogner, F.X. How Does a One-Day Environmental Education Programme Support Individual Connectedness with Nature? J. Biol. Educ. 2012, 46, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Liefländer, A.K.; Fröhlich, G.; Bogner, F.X.; Schultz, P.W. Promoting Connectedness with Nature through Environmental Education. Environ. Educ. Res. 2013, 19, 370–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Rosa, C.D.; Profice, C.C.; Collado, S. Nature Experiences and Adults’ Self-Reported Pro-Environmental Behaviors: The Role of Connectedness to Nature and Childhood Nature Experiences. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ryan, R.M.; Kuczkowski, R. The Imaginary Audience, Self-Consciousness, and Public Individuation in Adolescence. J. Pers. 1994, 62, 219–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Studente, S.; Seppala, N.; Sadowska, N. Facilitating Creative Thinking in the Classroom: Investigating the Effects of Plants and the Colour Green on Visual and Verbal Creativity. Think. Ski. Creat. 2016, 19, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Plambech, T.; Konijnendijk Van Den Bosch, C.C. The Impact of Nature on Creativity—A Study among Danish Creative Professionals. Urban For. Urban Green. 2015, 14, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Nisbet, E.K.; Zelenski, J.M.; Murphy, S.A. Happiness Is in Our Nature: Exploring Nature Relatedness as a Contributor to Subjective Well-Being. J. Happiness Stud. 2011, 12, 303–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Mohamed, N.; Othman, N.; Hamzah, H.; Zainal, M.H.; Malek, N.A. A Systematic Review of Botanical Gardens Towards Eco Restoration and Connectedness to Nature for Psychological Restoration. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 1067, 012003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 17 05406 g001
Figure 1. Hypothesized mediation model of this research.
Figure 1. Hypothesized mediation model of this research.
Sustainability 17 05406 g001
Sustainability 17 05406 g002
Figure 2. Mediation model for the NE on SWB via CN and Awe. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Note. The model controlled for gender and knowledge of nature as covariates. Total effect of NE on SWB = 0.20; total indirect effect = 0.17.
Figure 2. Mediation model for the NE on SWB via CN and Awe. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Note. The model controlled for gender and knowledge of nature as covariates. Total effect of NE on SWB = 0.20; total indirect effect = 0.17.
Sustainability 17 05406 g002
Sustainability 17 05406 g003
Figure 3. Mediation model of NE on SWB, with mediators of INS and Awe. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Note. The model controlled for gender and knowledge of nature as covariates. Total effect of NE on SWB = 0.20; total indirect effect = 0.19.
Figure 3. Mediation model of NE on SWB, with mediators of INS and Awe. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Note. The model controlled for gender and knowledge of nature as covariates. Total effect of NE on SWB = 0.20; total indirect effect = 0.19.
Sustainability 17 05406 g003
Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations between all variables (N = 301).
Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations between all variables (N = 301).
MSD1234
1.INS4.311.72
2. CN3.630.450.39 **
3. Awe4.791.020.32 **0.66 **
4. SWB10.832.380.26 **0.46 **0.52 **
5. NE2.240.650.34 **0.27 **0.31 **0.19 **
Note. ** p < 0.01.
Table 2. Mediation effect analysis of NE on SWB via CN and Awe.
Table 2. Mediation effect analysis of NE on SWB via CN and Awe.
EffectBootSEBootLLCIBootULCIRelative
Effect
Total0.170.0410.1010.260
Ind NE–CN–SWB0.060.0250.0150.11534%
Ind NE–Awe–SWB0.050.0240.0110.10830%
Ind NE–CN–Awe–SWB0.060.0200.0290.10836%
Table 3. Mediation effect analysis of NE on SWB via INS and Awe.
Table 3. Mediation effect analysis of NE on SWB via INS and Awe.
EffectBootSEBootLLCIBootULCIRelative
Effect
Total0.190.0460.1070.287
Ind NE–CN–SWB0.040.025−0.0020.096
Ind NE–Awe–SWB0.110.0360.0430.18458%
Ind NE–CN–Awe–SWB0.040.0150.0140.07321%
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhou, M.; Luo, Y.; Xu, Z.; Zhang, R.; Liu, X. Nature Exposure and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Roles of Connectedness to Nature and Awe. Sustainability 2025, 17, 5406. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125406

AMA Style

Zhou M, Luo Y, Xu Z, Zhang R, Liu X. Nature Exposure and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Roles of Connectedness to Nature and Awe. Sustainability. 2025; 17(12):5406. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125406

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhou, Meihui, Ying Luo, Zihan Xu, Ronghua Zhang, and Xiaoliang Liu. 2025. "Nature Exposure and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Roles of Connectedness to Nature and Awe" Sustainability 17, no. 12: 5406. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125406

APA Style

Zhou, M., Luo, Y., Xu, Z., Zhang, R., & Liu, X. (2025). Nature Exposure and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Roles of Connectedness to Nature and Awe. Sustainability, 17(12), 5406. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125406

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop