Comparing the Restoration Effect and Stress Recovery in Real and Virtual Environments with a Green Wall

Biophilic design, incorporating natural elements, is known to enhance stress recovery. Immersive virtual environments (IVEs) are increasingly utilized for biophilic design validation and research, but their efficacy in replicating the restorative effects of real environments remains uncertain. Varying responses to virtual settings suggest that specific design factors may affect their effectiveness. This study provides a novel comparison of the stress recovery and restoration effect between real and virtual green walls in a controlled climate chamber. Sixty-three participants were exposed to either a real or virtual green wall for seven minutes after a 5 min stressor task. Physiological stress responses, including heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), electrodermal activity (EDA), and skin temperature (ST), were recorded, alongside self-reported restoration and thermal comfort surveys. The findings showed that the real green wall provided significantly greater stress recovery, with reduced HR and EDA and increased HRV. The virtual green wall produced similar recovery effects only when considering procedural factors and specific exposure durations. Participants also reported greater restoration and comfort in the real setting. By identifying critical procedural factors and exposure durations, this study advances the application of IVEs in biophilic design, offering a pathway to enhance well-being in built environments through virtual interventions.