Research on the Healing Effect of the Waterscapes in Chinese Classical Gardens in Audiovisual Interaction
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Materials
2.2. Experimental Subjects
2.3. Data Collection
2.3.1. Eye-Tracking Data
2.3.2. Subjective Perceived Restorative Effect
2.4. Experimental Procedure
2.5. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Analysis of Subjective Perceived Restorative Effects
3.2. The Effect of Sound on Visual Attention
3.3. Influence of Types of Waterscapes on Visual Attention
3.3.1. Influence of the Type of Waterscape on Eye Movement Metrics Under Silent Conditions
3.3.2. Influence of the Type of Waterscape on Eye Movement Metrics Under Sound Conditions
3.4. Relationship Between the Subjective Perceived Restorative Effect and Eye Movement
3.5. Eye Movement Heatmap Analysis
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions and Prospects
5.1. Conclusions
- Waterscapes with audiovisual interactions have a greater restorative value than single visual stimuli do. The addition of natural sounds significantly enhances the environmentally restorative effects of waterscapes, as evidenced by both subjective perceptions and eye movement characteristics. Specifically, audiovisual stimuli increased restoration scores by 3.2% overall (Δ = 2.48, p = 0.004).
- Different types of waterscapes have significant impacts on environmental restoration. Dynamic waterscapes (such as falling water and spraying water) induce a greater cognitive load and psychological stress than still waterscapes (such as still water) while also exhibiting stronger visual appeal. However, overall, still waterscapes show better restorative effects.
- There are differences in visual behavioral characteristics between waterscapes with single visual stimuli and those with audiovisual interaction. Dynamic waterscapes with audiovisual interactions are more focused, whereas still waterscapes are more dispersed.
5.2. Limitations of the Study
5.3. Prospects
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Giles-Corti, B.; Vernez-Moudon, A.; Reis, R.; Turrell, G.; Dannenberg, A.L.; Badland, H.; Foster, S.; Lowe, M.; Sallis, J.F.; Stevenson, M.; et al. City planning and population health: A global challenge. Lancet 2016, 388, 2912–2924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Charlson, F.; Ali, S.; Augustinavicius, J.; Benmarhnia, T.; Birch, S.; Clayton, S.; Fielding, K.; Jones, L.; Juma, D.; Snider, L.; et al. Global priorities for climate change and mental health research. Environ. Int. 2022, 158, 106984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brooks, S.K.; Webster, R.K.; Smith, L.E.; Woodland, L.; Wessely, S.; Greenberg, N.; Rubin, G.J. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020, 395, 912–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Holmes, E.A.; O’Connor, R.C.; Perry, V.H.; Tracey, I.; Wessely, S.; Arseneault, L.; Ballard, C.; Christensen, H.; Cohen Silver, R.; Everall, I.; et al. Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: A call for action for mental health science. Lancet Psychiatry 2020, 7, 547–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rehm, J.; Shield, K.D. Global burden of disease and the impact of mental and addictive disorders. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 2019, 21, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kondo, M.C.; Fluehr, J.M.; McKeon, T.; Branas, C.C. Urban green space and its impact on human health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jackson, S.B.; Stevenson, K.T.; Larson, L.R.; Peterson, M.N.; Seekamp, E. Outdoor activity participation improves adolescents’ mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bratman, G.N.; Anderson, C.B.; Berman, M.G.; Cochran, B.; De Vries, S.; Flanders, J.; Folke, C.; Frumkin, H.; Gross, J.J.; Hartig, T.; et al. Nature and mental health: An ecosystem service perspective. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaax0903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, W. History of Classical Chinese Gardens, 3rd ed.; Tsinghua University Press: Beijing, China, 2008. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X.; Li, F. On the Health Thoughts in Chinese Classical Garden: Taking the Imperial Garden in Qing Dynasty as Example. Chin. Landsc. Archit. 2019, 35, 28–33. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Völker, S.; Kistemann, T. The impact of blue space on human health and well-being–Salutogenetic health effects of inland surface waters: A review. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2011, 214, 449–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Völker, S.; Kistemann, T. Developing the urban blue: Comparative health responses to blue and green urban open spaces in Germany. Health Place 2015, 35, 196–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 1995, 15, 169–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ulrich, R.S. Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In Behavior and the Natural Environment; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1983; pp. 85–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellert, S.R.; Wilson, E.O. The Biophilia Hypothesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Ulrich, R.S. View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science 1984, 224, 420–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finlay, J.; Franke, T.; McKay, H.; Sims-Gould, J. Therapeutic landscapes and wellbeing in later life: Impacts of blue and green spaces for older adults. Health Place 2015, 34, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Keijzer, C.; Tonne, C.; Sabia, S.; Basagaña, X.; Valentín, A.; Singh-Manoux, A.; Antó, M.J.; Alonso, J.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.; Sunyer, J.; et al. Green and blue spaces and physical functioning in older adults: Longitudinal analyses of the Whitehall II study. Environ. Int. 2019, 122, 346–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huynh, Q.; Craig, W.; Janssen, I.; Pickett, W. Exposure to public natural space as a protective factor for emotional well-being among young people in Canada. BMC Public Health 2013, 13, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, T.; Zhang, T.; Zhu, L.; Gao, Y.; Qiu, L. Exploring psychophysiological restoration and individual preference in the different environments based on virtual reality. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, S.; Xie, J.; Wang, H.; Wang, Q.; Chen, J.; Yang, Z.; Furuya, K. Natural dose of blue restoration: A field experiment on mental restoration of urban blue spaces. Land 2023, 12, 1834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, J.Y.; Lam, B.; Ong, Z.T.; Ooi, K.; Gan, W.S.; Kang, J.; Yeong, S.; Lee, I.; Tan, S.T. The effects of spatial separations between water sound and traffic noise sources on soundscape assessment. Build. Environ. 2020, 167, 106423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, F.; Liu, P.; Kang, J.; Meng, Q.; Wu, Y.; Yang, D. Relationships between landscape characteristics and the restorative quality of soundscapes in urban blue spaces. Appl. Acoust. 2022, 189, 108600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, G.; Yuan, M.; Ma, H.; Luo, Z.; Shao, S. Restorative effect of audio and visual elements in urban waterfront spaces. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1113134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guo, Y.; Wang, K.; Zhang, H.; Jiang, Z. Soundscape Perception Preference in an Urban Forest Park: Evidence from Moon Island Forest Park in Lu’an City. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rock, I.; Harris, C.S. Vision and touch. Sci. Am. 1967, 216, 96–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schafer, R.M. The New Soundscape; BMI Canada Limited: Toronto, ON, Canada, 1969; p. 57. [Google Scholar]
- Truax, B. Handbook for Acoustic Ecology; ARC Publications: Burnaby, BC, Canada, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Buxton, R.T.; Pearson, A.L.; Allou, C.; Fristrup, K.; Wittemyer, G. A synthesis of health benefits of natural sounds and their distribution in national parks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2013097118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uebel, K.; Marselle, M.; Dean, A.J.; Rhodes, J.R.; Bonn, A. Urban green space soundscapes and their perceived restorativeness. People Nat. 2021, 3, 756–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michels, N.; Hamers, P. Nature sounds for stress recovery and healthy eating: A lab experiment differentiating water and bird sound. Environ. Behav. 2023, 55, 175–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Conniff, A.; Craig, T. A methodological approach to understanding the wellbeing and restorative benefits associated with greenspace. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 19, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarsson, J.J.; Wiens, S.; Nilsson, M.E. Stress recovery during exposure to nature sound and environmental noise. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2010, 7, 1036–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Zhao, X.; Zhu, L.; Xia, Y.; Ma, Y.; Wu, J.; Xiong, X.; Yang, N.; Lu, M. Research on the healing potential of urban parks from the perspective of audio-visual integration: A case study of five urban parks in Chengdu. Land 2023, 12, 1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, R.; Li, S.; Bai, Z.; Xu, B.; Hu, Z. Are natural soundscapes always beneficial? Evaluating the restorative qualities and influencing mechanisms of natural water soundscapes. Appl. Acoust. 2025, 227, 110205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klaib, A.F.; Alsrehin, N.O.; Melhem, W.Y.; Bashtawi, H.O.; Magableh, A.A. Eye tracking algorithms, techniques, tools, and applications with an emphasis on machine learning and Internet of Things technologies. Expert Syst. Appl. 2021, 166, 114037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nordh, H.; Hagerhall, C.M.; Holmqvist, K. Tracking restorative components: Patterns in eye movements as a consequence of a restorative rating task. Landsc. Res. 2013, 38, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Zhuo, Z.; Liu, Q.; Yu, K.; Huang, Q.; Liu, J. The relationships between perceived design intensity, preference, restorativeness and eye movements in designed urban green space. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 10944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, Y.; Kim, E.J. Differences of restorative effects while viewing urban landscapes and green landscapes. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Purani, K.; Kumar, D.S. Exploring restorative potential of biophilic servicescapes. J. Serv. Mark. 2018, 32, 414–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Zhou, J. A Review of Eye-Tracking Applications in Biophilic Design. Build. Environ. 2024, 112179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, S.; Kaplan, R. The visual environment: Public participation in design and planning. J. Soc. Issues 1989, 45, 59–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Awada, M.; Becerik-Gerber, B.; Liu, R.; Seyedrezaei, M.; Lu, Z.; Xenakis, M.; Lucas, G.; Roll, S.; Narayanan, S. Ten questions concerning the impact of environmental stress on office workers. Build. Environ. 2023, 229, 109964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartig, T.; Korpela, K.; Evans, G.W.; Gärling, T. A measure of restorative quality in environments. Scand. Hous. Plan. Res. 1997, 14, 175–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, R. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Berto, R. Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. J. Environ. Psychol. 2005, 25, 249–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nordh, H.; Hartig, T.; Hagerhall, C.M.; Fry, G. Components of small urban parks that predict the possibility for restoration. Urban For. Urban Green. 2009, 8, 225–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laumann, K.; Gärling, T.; Stormark, K.M. Rating scale measures of restorative components of environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 2001, 21, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Browning, M.H.E.M.; Mimnaugh, K.J.; Van Riper, C.J.; Laurent, H.K.; LaValle, S.M. Can simulated nature support mental health? Comparing short, single-doses of 360-degree nature videos in virtual reality with the outdoors. Front. Psychol. 2020, 10, 2667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reese, G.; Stahlberg, J.; Menzel, C. Digital shinrin-yoku: Do nature experiences in virtual reality reduce stress and increase well-being as strongly as similar experiences in a physical forest? Virtual Real. 2022, 26, 1245–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweller, J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cogn. Sci. 1988, 12, 257–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrasco, M. Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vis. Res. 2011, 51, 1484–1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Staugaard, C.F.; Petersen, A.; Vangkilde, S. Eccentricity effects in vision and attention. Neuropsychologia 2016, 92, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jo, H.; Song, C.; Ikei, H.; Enomoto, S.; Kobayashi, H.; Miyazaki, Y. Physiological and psychological effects of forest and urban sounds using high-resolution sound sources. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, J.; Xu, W.; Ye, L. Effects of auditory-visual combinations on perceived restorative potential of urban green space. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 141, 169–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Hedger, S.C.; Nusbaum, H.C.; Clohisy, L.; Jaeggi, S.M.; Buschkuehl, M.; Berman, M.G. Of cricket chirps and car horns: The effect of nature sounds on cognitive performance. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2019, 26, 522–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, M.; Smith, A.; Humphryes, K.; Pahl, S.; Snelling, D.; Depledge, M. Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 482–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herzog, T.R.; Barnes, G.J. Tranquility and preference revisited. J. Environ. Psychol. 1999, 19, 171–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wen, H.; Lin, H.; Liu, X.; Guo, W.; Yao, J.; He, B.J. An assessment of the psychologically restorative effects of the environmental characteristics of university common spaces. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2025, 110, 107645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beatty, J. Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychol. Bull. 1982, 91, 276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, Y.; Hu, M.; Zhao, B. Audio-visual interactive evaluation of the forest landscape based on eye-tracking experiments. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 46, 126476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laeng, B.; Sirois, S.; Gredebäck, G. Pupillometry: A window to the preconscious? Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2012, 7, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berto, R.; Massaccesi, S.; Pasini, M. Do eye movements measured across high and low fascination photographs differ? Addressing Kaplan’s fascination hypothesis. J. Environ. Psychol. 2008, 28, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valtchanov, D.; Ellard, C.G. Cognitive and affective responses to natural scenes: Effects of low level visual properties on preference, cognitive load and eye-movements. J. Environ. Psychol. 2015, 43, 184–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franěk, M.; Šefara, D.; Petružálek, J.; Cabal, J.; Myška, K. Differences in eye movements while viewing images with various levels of restorativeness. J. Environ. Psychol. 2018, 57, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franconeri, S.L.; Alvarez, G.A.; Cavanagh, P. Flexible cognitive resources: Competitive content maps for attention and memory. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2013, 17, 134–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, S. Aesthetics, affect, and cognition: Environmental preference from an evolutionary perspective. Environ. Behav. 1987, 19, 3–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, Y.; RAO, R.P.N. Predictive coding. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 2011, 2, 580–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weng, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Huang, Y.; Lin, R.; Wang, M.; Dong, J. Anxiety and attention level induced by forest landscape images of backlight and frontlight in college students. Chin. Ment. Health J. 2020, 34, 361–366. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Fu, E.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, J.; Li, X.A. Tentative Research of Restorative Environmental Evaluation of Community Parks Base on Eye Movement Analysis. South Archit. 2022, 6, 93–99. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Klatt, S.; Noël, B.; Brocher, A. Pupil size in the evaluation of static and dynamic stimuli in peripheral vision. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0250027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Q.B.; Yang, Y.P. Xishu Garden; China Forestry Press: Being, China, 2019. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Stamps, A.E., III. Demographic effects in environmental aesthetics: A meta-analysis. J. Plan. Lit. 1999, 14, 155–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, X.; Din, N.C.; Lei, Y.; Mahyuddin, N. The restorative effects of outdoor soundscapes in nursing homes for elderly individuals. Build. Environ. 2023, 242, 110520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shu, S.; Ma, H. The restorative environmental sounds perceived by children. J. Environ. Psychol. 2018, 60, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sample Sites | Location | Water Feature Type | Environmental Characteristics | Soundscape Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|
S1 | Wang Cong Temple | Flowing Water | A straight, hard-edged embankment water channel with slow-moving water flowing forward | The sound of flowing water predominates, occasionally accompanied by birdsong |
S2 | Du Fu Thatched Cottage | A natural, straight water channel enclosed by plants on both sides with gently flowing water featuring slight differences in elevation | The sound of flowing water | |
S3 | San Su Shrine | A natural landscape of ancient architecture and a pond with water flowing near the building | The sound of flowing water predominates, faintly accompanied by birdsong | |
S4 | Wuhou Shrine | Falling Water | A linear waterfall flowing through the middle of a natural hillside leading into a pond | The sound of a waterfall splashing against rocks |
S5 | San Su Shrine | Water cascades down from multiple layers of rocks surrounded by dense vegetation | The sound of water splashing against rocks | |
S6 | Du Fu Thatched Cottage | Water flows rapidly down from the rocks, enclosed by plants and boulders | The sound of water splashing | |
S7 | Guihu Lake | Spraying Water | A natural pond enclosed by plants, featuring a small linear fountain in the center | The sounds of falling water and birdsong |
S8 | East Lake Park | A pond featuring an umbrella-shaped fountain and a small linear fountain with ancient architecture as the main backdrop | The sounds of spraying water and conversation | |
S9 | Fanghu Park: | In the center of an open lake, there is an umbrella-shaped fountain surrounded by tall trees along the edges | Predominantly the sounds of spraying water and falling water occasionally accompanied by birdsong | |
S10 | San Su Shrine | Still Water | A tranquil, open lake surface with ancient architecture forming a linear arrangement in the foreground | Various types of birdsong |
S11 | San Su Shrine | A tranquil pond, mostly occupied by lotus flowers, surrounded by ancient architecture and plants | Predominantly the sounds of cultural poetry accompanied by birdsong | |
S12 | Wuhou Shrine | A tranquil pond surrounded by plants with ancient buildings hidden among the greenery | Birdsong |
Eye Movement Indicator | Abbreviation | Interpretation | Basic Meaning | Unit |
---|---|---|---|---|
Average Pupil Diameter | APD | Average size of pupil dilation or constriction during observation | Reflects the degree of cognitive/mental load of the subject | mm |
Average Fixation Duration | AFD | Average time spent at each gaze point | Indicates the degree of distinctiveness and interest in object features | ms |
Fixation Frequency | FF | Number of gazes per unit of time | Indicates the efficiency of information perception | times/s |
Total Fixation Duration | TFD | Sum of all gaze times | Indicates the overall cognitive time of the subject | s |
Scene | Eye Movement Metrics | Mean Difference ± Standard Deviation | t | p | Cohen’s d |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
S1 | APD | 0.241 ± 0.327 | 4.348 | 0.000 | 0.757 |
AFD | −59.729 ± 546.253 | −0.624 | 0.537 | −0.109 | |
FF | 0.08 ± 0.651 | 0.693 | 0.493 | 0.121 | |
TFD | −0.566 ± 3.342 | −1.008 | 0.320 | −0.175 | |
S2 | APD | 0.254 ± 0.332 | 4.548 | 0.000 | 0.792 |
AFD | −351.211 ± 1309.03 | −1.612 | 0.116 | −0.281 | |
FF | 0.095 ± 0.829 | 0.683 | 0.499 | 0.119 | |
TFD | −0.898 ± 5.947 | −0.964 | 0.342 | −0.168 | |
S3 | APD | 0.235 ± 0.31 | 4.366 | 0.000 | 0.760 |
AFD | −145.458 ± 374.523 | −2.463 | 0.019 | −0.429 | |
FF | 0.351 ± 0.633 | 3.263 | 0.002 | 0.568 | |
TFD | −1.84 ± 4.37 | −2.945 | 0.006 | −0.513 | |
S4 | APD | 0.205 ± 0.338 | 3.573 | 0.001 | 0.622 |
AFD | −657.224 ± 1428.215 | −2.682 | 0.011 | −0.467 | |
FF | 0.291 ± 0.683 | 2.641 | 0.012 | 0.460 | |
TFD | −1.229 ± 5.086 | −1.388 | 0.174 | −0.242 | |
S5 | APD | 0.147 ± 0.245 | 3.366 | 0.002 | 0.586 |
AFD | −213.284 ± 549.526 | −2.186 | 0.036 | −0.381 | |
FF | 0.312 ± 0.746 | 2.732 | 0.010 | 0.476 | |
TFD | −2.63 ± 7.067 | −2.178 | 0.036 | −0.379 | |
S6 | APD | 0.225 ± 0.352 | 3.769 | 0.001 | 0.656 |
AFD | −119.793 ± 353.969 | −2.008 | 0.052 | −0.350 | |
FF | 0.249 ± 0.568 | 2.870 | 0.007 | 0.500 | |
TFD | −0.267 ± 4.577 | −0.462 | 0.647 | −0.080 | |
S7 | APD | 0.19 ± 0.29 | 3.451 | 0.002 | 0.601 |
AFD | −87.279 ± 762.832 | −0.621 | 0.539 | −0.108 | |
FF | 0.139 ± 0.573 | 1.384 | 0.175 | 0.241 | |
TFD | −1.845 ± 3.801 | −3.207 | 0.003 | −0.558 | |
S8 | APD | 0.227 ± 0.303 | 4.073 | 0.000 | 0.709 |
AFD | −105.17 ± 447.492 | −1.417 | 0.165 | −0.247 | |
FF | 0.149 ± 0.554 | 1.451 | 0.156 | 0.253 | |
TFD | −3.033 ± 5.565 | −3.205 | 0.003 | −0.558 | |
S9 | APD | 0.234 ± 0.271 | 4.712 | 0.000 | 0.820 |
AFD | −3.294 ± 400.371 | −0.048 | 0.962 | −0.008 | |
FF | 0.04 ± 0.569 | 0.398 | 0.693 | 0.069 | |
TFD | −0.695 ± 3.956 | −1.177 | 0.247 | −0.205 | |
S10 | APD | 0.276 ± 0.326 | 4.935 | 0.000 | 0.859 |
AFD | −74.311 ± 395.878 | −1.077 | 0.289 | −0.187 | |
FF | 0.062 ± 0.408 | 0.527 | 0.601 | 0.092 | |
TFD | −0.484 ± 2.407 | −1.008 | 0.320 | −0.175 | |
S11 | APD | 0.152 ± 0.251 | 3.366 | 0.002 | 0.586 |
AFD | 27.663 ± 334.225 | 0.467 | 0.643 | 0.081 | |
FF | −0.063 ± 0.577 | −0.574 | 0.569 | −0.100 | |
TFD | −0.483 ± 4.878 | −0.832 | 0.411 | −0.145 | |
S12 | APD | 0.242 ± 0.294 | 4.712 | 0.000 | 0.820 |
AFD | −175.189 ± 609.251 | −1.563 | 0.127 | −0.272 | |
FF | 0.039 ± 0.575 | 0.374 | 0.711 | 0.065 | |
TFD | −0.028 ± 3.8 | −0.048 | 0.962 | −0.008 |
Eye Movement Metrics | Waterscape Type | Mean ± Standard Deviation | F | p | η2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
APD | Flowing Water | 3.778 ± 0.481 | 4.216 | 0.009 | 0.182 |
Falling Water | 3.780 ± 0.437 d | ||||
Spraying Water | 3.789 ± 0.451 d | ||||
Still Water | 3.721 ± 0.472 bc | ||||
AFD | Flowing Water | 763.529 ± 51.764 | 0.120 | 0.948 | 0.006 |
Falling Water | 778.916 ± 73.663 | ||||
Spraying Water | 793.434 ± 75.44 | ||||
Still Water | 769.423 ± 57.366 | ||||
FF | Flowing Water | 1.484 ± 0.581 | 0.566 | 0.645 | 0.091 |
Falling Water | 1.453 ± 0.532 | ||||
Spraying Water | 1.46 ± 0.578 | ||||
Still Water | 1.419 ± 0.516 | ||||
TFD | Flowing Water | 34.452 ± 2.806 | 1.012 | 0.394 | 0.051 |
Falling Water | 33.617 ± 3.602 | ||||
Spraying Water | 33.454 ± 3.728 | ||||
Still Water | 33.748 ± 2.915 |
Eye Movement Metrics | Waterscape Type | Mean ± Standard Deviation | F | p | η2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
APD | Flowing Water | 3.535 ± 0.345 b | 8.776 | <0.001 | 0.316 |
Falling Water | 3.587 ± 0.354 ad | ||||
Spraying Water | 3.572 ± 0.377 d | ||||
Still Water | 3.498 ± 0.366 bc | ||||
AFD | Flowing Water | 948.994 ± 490.477 | 2.084 | 0.112 | 0.099 |
Falling Water | 1109.017 ± 626.125 | ||||
Spraying Water | 858.682 ± 501.352 | ||||
Still Water | 843.369 ± 432.191 | ||||
FF | Flowing Water | 1.308 ± 0.517 | 3.614 | 0.018 | 0.160 |
Falling Water | 1.170 ± 0.561 d | ||||
Spraying Water | 1.352 ± 0.494 | ||||
Still Water | 1.407 ± 0.460 b | ||||
TFD | Flowing Water | 35.553 ± 3.041 d | 2.980 | 0.039 | 0.136 |
Falling Water | 34.992 ± 3.438 | ||||
Spraying Water | 35.311 ± 2.871 d | ||||
Still Water | 34.079 ± 3.182 ac |
Sound Condition | Eye Movement Metrics | Pearson’s Correlation | p |
---|---|---|---|
Silent | APD | 0.098 | 0.072 |
AFD | 0.016 | 0.771 | |
FF | 0.167 ** | 0.002 | |
TFD | −0.049 | 0.366 | |
Sound | APD | 0.093 | 0.089 |
AFD | 0.064 | 0.241 | |
FF | −0.013 | 0.809 | |
TFD | −0.165 ** | 0.002 |
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. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhai, Z.; Cao, L.; Li, Q.; Gong, Z.; Guo, L.; Zhang, D. Research on the Healing Effect of the Waterscapes in Chinese Classical Gardens in Audiovisual Interaction. Buildings 2025, 15, 2310. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15132310
Zhai Z, Cao L, Li Q, Gong Z, Guo L, Zhang D. Research on the Healing Effect of the Waterscapes in Chinese Classical Gardens in Audiovisual Interaction. Buildings. 2025; 15(13):2310. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15132310
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhai, Zhigao, Luning Cao, Qinhan Li, Zheng Gong, Li Guo, and Deshun Zhang. 2025. "Research on the Healing Effect of the Waterscapes in Chinese Classical Gardens in Audiovisual Interaction" Buildings 15, no. 13: 2310. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15132310
APA StyleZhai, Z., Cao, L., Li, Q., Gong, Z., Guo, L., & Zhang, D. (2025). Research on the Healing Effect of the Waterscapes in Chinese Classical Gardens in Audiovisual Interaction. Buildings, 15(13), 2310. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15132310