This study aimed to examine how different types of forest landscape images influence psychological preference by analyzing hemodynamic responses in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and subjective image evaluations. Forest landscapes were categorized into f...
This study aimed to examine how different types of forest landscape images influence psychological preference by analyzing hemodynamic responses in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and subjective image evaluations. Forest landscapes were categorized into four types—geographical resources, waterscapes, forest resources, and cultural resources—and representative images of each type, along with those of city landscapes encountered in daily life, were selected as visual stimuli. During the observation of each landscape type, changes in oxyhemoglobin (Oxy-Hb) concentrations in the entire PFC and its subregions—the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC), lateral orbitofrontal cortex (LOFC), and frontopolar prefrontal cortex (FP-PFC)—were measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Additionally, psychological preferences for different forest landscape types were evaluated using the semantic differential (SD) method, and participants were asked to rank their favorite landscape type.
The results indicated that Oxy-Hb concentrations were relatively higher when viewing city landscapes compared to forest landscapes. This may suggest that city landscapes elicit greater cognitive processing demands. Conversely, forest landscape images generally showed lower hemodynamic responses, which could be associated with neurophysiological stability and emotional recovery. These findings imply that forest landscapes may play a role in promoting physiological relaxation through visual stimulation.
Distinct activation patterns across the PFC subregions were observed depending on landscape type. Geographical resources showed relatively higher activation in the DLPFC, LOFC, and FP-PFC, suggesting their potential involvement in spatial information processing, planning, and cognitive exploration. These neurophysiological patterns corresponded to the SD evaluations characterized by perceptions such as “beautiful, “open,” and “vital,” implying that geographical resources may evoke cognitive vitality and exploratory engagement.
Waterscapes exhibited relatively lower activation in the VLPFC and LOFC, which may reflect emotional stability and stress reduction. Psychological evaluations revealed positive emotional attributes such as “cool,” “comfortable,” and “clean,” and waterscapes received the highest preference ranking among all types. This finding suggests that waterscapes may be particularly suitable for spatial compositions designed for rest and relaxation.
Forest resources showed moderately higher activation in the VLPFC and LOFC, indicating possible involvement in emotional evaluation. These landscapes were rated highly on dimensions such as “beautiful,” “spacious,” and “open.” However, their lower preference ranking suggests that forest resources may be more effectively utilized in harmony with other landscape types rather than in isolation.
Cultural resources generally showed lower activation throughout the PFC, while psychological evaluations emphasized attributes such as “harmonious” and “romantic.” They were also ranked relatively high in preference, indicating that landscapes combining natural and artificial elements may contribute to aesthetic satisfaction and emotional comfort. This suggests that cultural resources could be valuable components in environments designed to incorporate cultural and emotional satisfaction.
Overall, the results suggest that different forest landscape types have differential effects on both overall and regional PFC activation patterns, and that neural activity, psychological evaluation, and preference may interact complementarily. City landscapes appeared to induce responses related to cognitive load, whereas forest landscapes produced diverse positive effects—such as cognitive stimulation, psychological stability, and aesthetic satisfaction—depending on their type. These results highlight the importance of a tailored approach that reflects the specific characteristics of each forest landscape type rather than treating forests as homogeneous green spaces.
This study is meaningful in that forest landscapes were classified into detailed types, and the differential responses of PFC subregions were objectively verified using fNIRS. By integrating neurophysiological indicators with psychological evaluations, this study explored how forest landscapes may relate to both neural and psychological responses. The findings could be applied to the design of restorative and recreational environments and the development of user-oriented forest therapy programs. Furthermore, they may contribute to the creation of non-face-to-face forest therapy content, allowing diverse populations to experience the therapeutic value of forests.