LAUSR

Research suggests that stays in a forest promote relaxation and reduce stress compared to spending time in a city. The aim of this study was to compare stays in a forest with another natural environment, a cultivated field. Healthy, highly sensitive persons (HSP, SV12 score > 18) aged between 18 and 70 years spent one hour in the forest and in the field at intervals of one week. The primary outcome was measured using the Change in Subjective Self-Perception (CSP-14) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were measured using the Profile Of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire and by analyzing salivary cortisol. We randomized 43 participants. Thirty-nine were allocated and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (90% female, mean age 45 years). CSP-14 in part showed significant differences—total score (p = 0.054, Cohen’s d = 0.319), item “integration” (p = 0.028, Cohen’s d = 0.365)—favoring the effects of the forest. These effects were more pronounced in summer (August). In October, during rainfall, we detected no relevant differences. POMS only showed a significant difference in the subcategory “depression/anxiety” in favor of the field. The amount of cortisol in saliva was not different between the groups. A short-term stay in a forest in summer caused a greater improvement in mood and well-being in HSP than in a field. This effect was not detectable during bad weather in the fall.