Attention
Is mindfulness training in nature as effective as standard training?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
Mindfulness training practiced in a supportive natural setting is just as effective at reducing stress and improving focus as conventional indoor training but requires less effort.
Key findings
Both training groups showed significant average improvements in mindfulness, cognitive function, and stress compared to pre-course baselines, outperforming the passive control group with moderate-to-large effect sizes ranging from 0.30 to 0.58. Nature-based training was just as effective as conventional training, with differences in their outcomes being extremely small, with an eta-squared of less than 0.01. On an individual level, 38% of the 105 completing participants experienced a reliable improvement across the measured domains, with no major differences in success or deterioration rates between the two types of courses, as the phi coefficient was less than 0.1.
Methodology
Researchers investigated whether a 5-week mindfulness program in nature works as well as standard indoor training. They randomized 152 students experiencing stress or concentration problems to either a course held in a botanical garden greenhouse or a course in a plain classroom. Each course consisted of one 90-minute class per week. In the final round of the study, they also tracked 21 passive control participants who received no training.
Limitations
Because the study design combined different physical environments with distinct meditation techniques, it cannot isolate whether the positive effects of nature-based training were due to the outdoor setting, the effortless meditation style, or their combination. Additionally, because the sample was restricted to university students with self-reported stress, the findings may not apply to clinical populations with diagnosed psychological disorders. Finally, the research relied entirely on subjective, self-reported questionnaires, meaning it does not show how these interventions affect objective, behavioral, or physiological indicators of stress and cognition.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Not yet placed on a claim. This paper has study layers, but no concept page yet cites it as support, challenge, or qualifier.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.