城市公园不同滨水驳岸空间的恢复效应比较及其影响因素

A Comparison of Waterfront Edge Space Restoration Effects in Urban Parks and Their Influence Factors

摘要

【目的】探讨城市公园不同滨水驳岸空间对居民压力缓解与情绪恢复的影响，为健康导向城市滨水空间优化提供依据。【方法】采用“基线－压力－恢复”试验范式，结合生理监测(EEG、HRV)与主观评价(正负性情绪量表、感知恢复量表)，组织受试者在4种滨水驳岸空间进行现场体验，以公园道路为对照，通过双因素重复测量方差分析比较不同空间类型的恢复效应差异，并以Pearson相关分析探究环境特征与恢复效益之间的关联。【结果】时间主效应对各类生理指标均达极显著水平(P<0.0001)，空间与时间的交互效应不显著(P>0.05)。心理恢复方面，各空间类型均表现出积极情绪提升和消极情绪缓解趋势；远离性、延展性、魅力性、兼容性在空间类型间差异显著(P<0.001，兼容性P<0.05)。相关分析显示，水体可及性、水生植物丰富度及驳岸自然度等指标与部分恢复指标呈正相关，人工干扰度与多数生理指标呈负相关。EEG各频段、HRV及正负情绪指标在恢复期较压力期均表现出显著改善。【结论】城市公园滨水驳岸空间具有显著的身心恢复效益，但不同类型空间之间未表现出显著差异化恢复效应，恢复效果与多项环境特征呈正向关联。未来研究可进一步结合客观空间指标，深入揭示环境特征与恢复效应之间的作用机制。

Abstract

【Objective】The study explores the impact of different waterfront edge spaces in urban parks on stress reduction and emotional recovery among residents, aiming to provide evidence for health-oriented optimization of urban waterfront spaces. 【Method】A “baseline-stress-recovery” experimental paradigm is adopted in combination with physiological monitoring (EEG and HRV) and subjective assessments (Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Perceived Recovery Scale) to organize participants for an on-site experiential activity in four types of waterfront edge space. With park paths as the control, a two-way repeated measures ANOVA is adopted to compare their recovery effects, and Pearson correlation analysis is employed to examine the relationship between environmental characteristics and recovery benefits. 【Result】Time has a highly significant main effect on all physiological indicators (P<0.0001), while the interactive effect between space and time is not significant (P>0.05). Regarding psychological restoration, all types of spaces show the trends toward increased positive emotions and reduced negative emotions. Distance, extensibility, fascination and compatibility are significantly different among all types of spaces (P<0.001; compatibility P<0.05). The correlation analysis reveals that the indicators such as waterbody accessibility, aquatic plant richness and shoreline naturalness are positively correlated with certain recovery indicators, whereas human disturbance levels are negatively correlated with most physiological indicators. EEG frequency bands, HRV and positive/negative emotional indicators all improve significantly during the recovery phase compared to the stress phase. 【Conclusion】Waterfront edge spaces in urban parks have significant physical and psychological restorative benefits, although no significant differentiated restorative effects are observed among various types of spaces. Restoration outcomes are positively linked to multiple environmental characteristics. Future research could further integrate objective spatial metrics to deepen the understanding of the action mechanisms underlying the relationship between environmental features and restorative effects.

关键词

滨水驳岸空间 / 复愈性环境 / 情绪恢复 / 生理反馈技术

Key words

waterfront edge space / restorative environment / emotional recovery / physiological feedback technology

参考文献

[1] COSSELMAN K E, NAVAS—ACIEN A, KAUFMAN J D. Environmental factors in cardiovascular disease[J]. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 2015, 12(11): 627-642.

[2] 薛滨夏, 左曦, 李同予, 等 . 绿色暴露对城市居民健康影响研究进展[J]. 中国城市林业, 2025, 23(3): 64-72.

[3] LUO L, YU P, JIANG B. Differentiating mental health promotion effects of various blue spaces: an electroencephalography study[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2023, 88: 102010.

[4] 袁敬诚, 董潇迪, 曲天媛. 健康导向的城市滨水空间研究进展与展望[J]. 规划师, 2021, 37(15): 51-60.

[5] 刘新航, 张培, 王潇, 等 . 校园景观感知下心理亚健康中学生的缓压效果[J]. 中国城市林业, 2025, 23(3): 34-41.

[6] 梅雪莹, 贾新平, 唐玲, 等 . 茉莉花香气对人体身心健康的影响[J]. 中国城市林业, 2026, 24(1): 105-115.

[7] 笪辰璐, 马慧莹, 高鑫梅, 等 . 冬季街道景观恢复效应的景观感应流变分析: 基于虚拟现实与可穿戴生理传感的证据[J]. 中国园林, 2025, 41(11): 37-44.

[8] BINARTI F, SEKARLANGI N, et al. EEG—based neurophysiological responses to classroom window views in green campus settings[J]. Journal of Daylighting, 2025, 12(2): 359-374.

[9] LU Y H, LIU H, ZHU Y, et al. Green relief: an exploration into the restorative effects of urban green spaces on eye strain[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2025, 112: 128890.

[10] TANG P M, KLOTZ A, MCCLEAN S, et al. From natural to novel: the cognition—broadening effects of contact with nature at work on creativity[J]. Journal of Management, 2024, 50(7): 2490-2533.

[11] 吴逸, 裘鸿菲, 罗心玥, 等 . 基于恢复性感知的城市滨水绿地景观要素对公众健康行为影响[J]. 风景园林, 2025, 32(3): 119-126.

[12] MA X Y, SONG L, HONG B, et al. Relationships between EEG and thermal comfort of elderly adults in outdoor open spaces[J]. Building and Environment, 2023, 235: 110212.

[13] YAO X H, YU Z W, MA W Y, et al. Quantifying threshold effects of physiological health benefits in green space exposure[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2024, 241: 104917.

[14] SIMFUWE C, ANSSA A, YOUN Y C. Investigating gamma frequency band PSD in Alzheimer's disease using qEEG from eyes—open and eyes—closed resting states[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2025, 14(12): 4256.

[15] SHI J, ZHANG N, SUN Y N, et al. The impact of virtual images of coastal landscape features on stress recovery based on EEG[J]. Scientific Reports, 2025, 15: 17369.

[16] LAN Y X, TANG Y Y, LIU Z H, et al. Combined effects of the visual—acoustic environment on public response in urban forests[J]. Forests, 2024, 15(5): 858.

[17] 张双全, 徐畅, 钟永德. 森林景观色彩对大学生心理健康的影响研究[J]. 自然保护地, 2022, 2(4): 100-108.

[18] 付婧莞, 陆明. 寒地校园冬季景观对大学生脑疲劳的感知恢复效用研究[J]. 西安建筑科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 52(6): 905-911.

[19] KAPLAN S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1995, 15(3): 169-182.

[20] ULRICH R S, SIMONS R F, LOSITO B D, et al. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1991, 11(3): 201-230.

[21] 赵仁林, 戢梓童, 华桐, 等 . 基于视觉感知的城市滨水恢复性环境特征因子提取与评价[J]. 中国城市林业, 2026, 24(3): 16-24.

基金资助

*河南省科技攻关项目(252102320318)