ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Foreground, midground, and restoration: EEG and preference responses to depth-controlled rural scenes.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Exposure to natural and rural landscapes has been associated with stress reduction and psychological restoration. However, conventional photograph-based experiments often provide limited control over individual landscape elements and their positions within the visual field. This study examined whether depth-controlled, AI-generated rural landscape stimuli could support stress recovery and clarify how foreground and midground elements relate to landscape preference and EEG-based responses. Methods: Depth estimation, layer masking, and FLUX-based image editing were used to construct 27 controlled rural landscape stimuli. Selected foreground and midground elements were modified while the background context was kept relatively stable. Thirty participants completed a stress-induction task followed by rural landscape viewing and a duration-matched blank-screen control condition. Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, EEG beta/alpha (β/α) stress index, and POMS mood scores were measured at baseline, after stress induction, and after recovery. Landscape preference ratings and image-level EEG responses were analyzed for the rural landscape stimuli. Results: Compared with blank-screen viewing, rural landscape viewing produced significantly greater recovery in all seven stage-level outcomes after Holm correction. Rural-minus-blank recovery differences were -4.45 mmHg for systolic blood pressure, -3.93 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure, -5.85 bpm for heart rate, and -0.10 for the EEG β/α stress index. Within the rural landscape stimuli, foreground water was associated with higher preference ratings (estimate = 0.500, SE = 0.084, Discussion: Validated AI-generated rural images can serve as controlled stimuli in environmental psychology research. The findings suggest that rural landscape viewing may promote stronger physiological, EEG-based, and affective recovery than passive blank-screen viewing, while visual preference and EEG-based restoration may follow partly distinct depth-layered pathways. Given the exploratory design, the depth-layer findings should be interpreted cautiously and require confirmation in more systematically balanced stimulus sets.
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.