Reflect on your most unforgettable moment in nature. Did you catch sight of a bird you had never seen before? Plunge your feet into a stream? Perhaps scale a tree?

Recent findings from the University of Washington, released in the Journal of Environmental Education, explored whether children’s physical interactions with nature, rather than mere visual observations, correlate with being present and feeling connected to something larger than oneself.

Researchers analyzed responses from 127 Girl Scouts aged 8 to 11, regarding a recent significant nature encounter. A survey assessed how much participants felt a sense of presence in nature, which the study defined as the experience of being in the moment. The exploratory analyses revealed that those who had physical interactions conveyed a stronger sense of presence in nature compared to those who described only visual experiences. 

Carly Gray, a co-author of the research and a doctoral psychology student at UW, discussed the study with UW News.

Can you clarify the distinction between physical and visual interactions with nature?

Carly Gray: We consider physical interactions with nature as those that engage senses beyond just sight. Often, the entire body is involved. Whether in motion or stationary, one experiences nature through more than just one’s eyes. A visual interaction with nature is confined to the sense of sight—such as observing a bird through a window or examining the surface of a leaf.

To differentiate between visual and physical interactions in our study, we employed what is known as an interaction pattern approach, which characterizes how humans engage with nature. An abstract interaction pattern could include something like “listening to animals.” This pattern could cover more specific interactions, ranging from “hearing a dog bark from next door” to “enjoying birdsong in a forest.”

This brings us to the concept of presence. How is the term utilized within the framework of this study and connected to the other concepts you’ve mentioned? 

CG: We define presence as a profound experience with heightened awareness and some feeling of connection transcending oneself—whether to the natural surroundings, a higher power, other companions, or something else entirely. It is, to be frank, challenging to articulate, which, I believe, underscores the significance of what these experiences can evoke. In this research, we specifically focused on presence within the context of nature.

How did you go about quantifying this data?

CG: We formulated questions grounded in existing metrics and created some original questions. These queries were directed at the Girl Scouts concerning their sense of presence in nature during the experiences they had just described.

We instructed the Girl Scouts to recount a significant nature experience, detailing where they were, what actions they undertook, and why it held meaning. We meticulously examined these narratives to identify interaction patterns and devised a coding manual for standardization. Upon reviewing half of these nature narratives, we observed that many were heavily reliant on visual terms. Predominantly, we noted action words like seeing, watching, looking, staring. For instance, a visual nature interaction might be “looking at a tall tree.”

We questioned what could differentiate the Girl Scouts who reported solely visual experiences from those who had more physical nature interactions. The Girl Scouts who utilized more action-oriented verbs—talking, listening, smelling, feeling—participated in physical nature interactions. Examples included “building a snowman” and “hiking a trail,” which appeared in several accounts. Among my favorite instances were “talking to chickens,” “jumping in puddles,” and “throwing snowballs.”

Depending on their interaction patterns, some Girl Scouts were classified as having only visual experiences. If a Girl Scout mentioned at least one interaction that incorporated a non-visual verb, she was categorized as experiencing a physical interaction. We then compared these groups—physical and solely visual—by analyzing their numerical scores on our presence metric and discovered that those who reported physical nature interactions also indicated a stronger sense of presence in nature.

What are some possible practical ramifications of this research?

CG: I believe this represents a hopeful initial stride towards comprehending what constitutes a meaningful experience in nature, particularly among young children. In this paper, we specifically outlined applications for environmental education. For instance, children can be encouraged to engage their sense of smell in nature by discovering aromatic natural items, such as pinecones or flowers, and bringing them back to school for an age-appropriate ecology discussion. A writing lesson could start with students listening to nature with their eyes closed, followed by composing a creative short story based on what they imagined hearing. We anticipate that these physical educational activities may enhance connections to nature and create a sense of meaning through experiences of presence within natural settings.

While we conducted this study with Girl Scouts aged 8 to 11, I believe it could have implications for educating youth of various ages. In my teaching practices, I strongly advocate for engaging the entire body in the learning process. Thus, the concept of physical versus visual interactions with nature could be applicable from preschoolers up to college students.

Physical interactions with nature don’t have to be confined to educational environments. This notion of physical versus visual nature interactions can serve as a beneficial framework for parents and families seeking meaningful ways to engage with nature alongside their children. This Earth Day, think about how you can transcend merely observing spring flowers to engage with nature in more fully embodied manners.

Other co-authors included Peter Kahn, a UW professor of psychology and environmental and forest sciences; Joshua Lawler, a UW professor of environmental and forest sciences; Pooja Tandon, an associate professor of pediatrics at the UW School of Medicine; Gregory Bratman, an associate professor of environmental and forest sciences at UW; Sara Perrins, head public health research scientist at ICF, who received her doctorate in environmental and forest sciences.at the UW; and Frances Boyens from the Girl Scouts of Western Washington.

The research was financed by the Richard King Mellon Foundation.

For additional details, reach out to Carly Gray at [email protected].