ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
An experimental study of the acute effects of visual and olfactory nature stimuli on task performance.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Nature exposure has been associated with improvements in physiological, emotional, and cognitive functioning. However, workplace research has primarily focused on visual access to nature, despite nature being inherently a multisensory experience. Drawing on Attention Restoration Theory (ART), Stress Reduction Theory (SRT), and emerging work on olfactory environments ("smellscapes"), this study examines how visual and olfactory nature stimuli independently and jointly influence cognitive and behavioral outcomes in workplace settings. Methods: A between-subjects experiment ( Results: Effects varied by sensory condition and outcome. Visual exposure was associated with improvements in attention and abstract reasoning, whereas olfactory exposure was associated with memory performance and dishonest responding. Significant interactions were observed for several outcomes, including attention, memory, risk-taking, and dishonest responding. Blink rates were generally lower under nature exposure conditions than in the control condition. Physiological measures indicated reduced blink rates under nature exposure conditions relative to control environments, suggesting differences in visual attention and task engagement across experimental conditions. Discussion: These findings suggest that multisensory nature exposure differentially influences cognitive and behavioral processes in workplace environments rather than producing uniform benefits. By demonstrating that low-cost, passive interventions such as visual and olfactory cues can shape attention, decision-making, and mental overload, this study advances environmental psychology and supports the integration of multisensory design strategies to enhance workplace functioning and overall productivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.