RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 1

Cover Letter

Some of the biggest changes I made to the study were procedural. First, and most notable,

was the frequency of testing the subjects. Instead of just being tested once in the beginning and

once at the end, the subjects are now tested once in the beginning, once every week of the study,

and once at the end; making a total of 5 times tested. Additionally, I made some changes to the

participant section. Instead of barring all varsity athletes from participating, I only stopped

varsity athletes that spent a significant amount of practice time outside like tennis or lacrosse.

This allows my population pool to still include athletes, an important part of our undergraduate

population, without skewing the results. I also added that these participants will be compensated

for their work, $20/hour, to motivate the participants to complete the study. I kept my measures,

the surveys the same; theyre peer reviewed and quantifiable, but I did add the life stressor test to

be taken at the end of the study to integrate a control for outside stress inducing confounding

variables. Another thing I didnt change, but was suggested to me by my peer reviewer was

standardizing one location and time for all the students to go to for their 15 mins of nature. I

decided not to do that because for the participants, it may get monotonous or inconvenient to

travel to the same place every day for 15 mins; these factors may add to the stress or irritation of

the student, acting as a confounding variable. I feel that the experiment is just inherently

standardized when it comes to the natural environments. All the participants are Stanford

freshman exposed to the same areas and for convenience purposes will most likely be going to

places on or around campus every day for their 15 mins. Although variability in sunlight might

be a confounding variable, I dont think it biases the results as much as they would be biased by

standardizing the location and time of day for the session and thereby creating a chore obligation

for the students and adding to stress instead of detracting from it. Besides the actual procedural
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 2

and experimental changes I made to the experiment, I did a lot of other revisions including

completely redrafting my introduction and expanding upon the discussion section and more that

you will see below.

I chose my experimental study because it more directly addresses my research question.

My question was: how outdoor exposure in undergrads is linked to better mental health; for

example, decreases in stress and increases in self-confidence. My other correlational study

addresses this question indirectly, by measuring the correlation between sleep quality and time

spent outside. While sleep quality is an indirect indicator of mental health, it is not as direct a

scale as the surveys I have included in this experimental study. Therefore, with this study I can

most accurately answer my initial posed question.

RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 3

Research & Writing Project

Part IV

Madeline Libbey

Stanford University
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 4

Introduction:

The everyday life of an undergraduate can be taxing; while juggling classes, tests, p-sets,

clubs, and a social life. On top of doing well academically, mental health and self-confidence, as

well as test anxiety are all relevant issues to undergraduate students, as they all contribute to

quality of life at a university. Its no surprise that in this environment, many Stanford students

can go entire quarters without taking advantage of the South Bays natural bounty. Over the past

ten years, research has illustrated that nature can act as a buffer for stressful life events for

children living in rural areas. This research also conveyed that the quality of nature and amount,

was significant; children with more nature nearby their homes, were less effected by stressful life

events (Wells, 2003). Other research shows that exposure to the outdoors and outdoor activities

can improve sleep quality, as well as reduce other symptoms of PTSD in veterans. Veterans who

participated in an outdoor retreat reported higher sleep quality and alertness, and lower anxiety

and stress (Vella, 2013). While both of these studies and more show the benefits of nature in

some populations, there is a gap in research when it comes to the effects of natural exposure in

undergraduate populations specifically. In a hectic and stressful university culture, this study

seeks to explore the benefits of taking a break from undergraduate stress and enjoying time

outside. This study assesses a sample of undergraduates for academic stress and perceived self-

worth using peer reviewed methods like the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1965) and

Westside test anxiety scale (Driscoll, 2004), then exposes the experimental group to natural

environment--without distraction--every day, reassessing both the control and experimental

groups each week for three weeks. A decrease in stress and increase in self-worth is expected in

those exposed to more nature because these same effects have been illustrated in younger

populations (Wells, 2003), and similarly seen in older populations suffering from stress-related
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 5

mental illness (Vella, 2013). If these assumptions are true, then undergraduates should be

positively affected by outdoor exposure.

Summary:

This experiment addresses the question of how academic anxiety and self-worth is

affected by exposure to nature by comparing college students ratings of self-worth and academic

anxiety after being exposed to a natural environment 15 minutes each day for a month to a

control group.

Participants:

The participants will be randomly selected from the Stanford 2020 class, using a random

number generator selecting student identification numbers (SUID). We will exclude students on

varsity sports teams that practice outside (tennis, soccer, football etc.), because their proportion

of time spent outdoors daily may skew the results. The first 100 students will be randomly

assigned to the experimental group, and the next 100 students will be the control group; this

sample size is large enough to make claims about the population (7,000 undergraduates), while

also small enough to perform a two sample t-test 200x20 < 7,000. The participants will be

recruited by promised compensation of $20/hour of time spent participating in the experiment.

The pay is arranged on an hour by hour basis because half of the students will be spending 15

minutes every day on this study while the other half will need only spend the time it takes to take

the surveys, and thus both should be compensated proportionally to their burden and time

commitment.

Procedures:

After obtaining the participant groups, we will first require they sign a consent form

outlining the purpose and methods of this study and then assess their individual status on global
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 6

perceived self-worth and confidence as well as academic/test anxiety through the Rosenberg self-

esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1965) and the Westside Test Anxiety Scale (Driscoll, 2004) in a

laboratory setting. The control group will go about their lives in a normal fashion after the initial

survey; they will be reassessed each week of the experiment. The experimental group will be

assigned to spend 15 mins every day outside for 3 weeks. Preferably, but not mandatorily in an

area with less people and more nature, nature meaning: foliage, native plants and wildlife, less

human activity. No technology usage will be permitted for these 15 mins. This time must be

spent while the sun is up, not while setting/rising, or after sun down. This group will also be

reassessed each week of the experiment. After the three weeks both groups will be re-assessed

once more individually in a lab setting. In this final assessment, an additional life stress test will

be administered to control for stressful life events that may have occurred during the course of

the experiment that may skew the results of a participant. The results of any participants over a

certain threshold on this life stressor test will be ignored in the analysis.

Measures:

The dependent variables for this experiment are perceived self-worth, and test/academic

anxiety.

These will be measured with The Rosenberg self-esteem scale, created by Rosenberg M.

of Princeton University (Rosenberg, 1965) and the Westside Test Anxiety Scale, created by

Richard Driscoll PhD of the American Test Anxiety Association (Driscoll, 2004). An additional

scale, the Life Change Index Scale (The Stress Test), created by Holmes of Dartmouth

University (Holmes, 1967) will be administered during the last assessment to control for stressful

life events that may have occurred during the course of the experiment.
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 7

The Rosenberg self-esteem scale is a short (10 item) scale used to measure both negative

and positive self-perceptions using a 4-point format ranging from strongly agree to strongly

disagree (Rosenberg, 1965). This will be used to assess the global perception of self-worth of all

participants before, during, and after the exposure or non-exposure to nature. This scale is used

over other scales because it directly addresses the issue of perceived self-worth with questions

that concern issues of self-worth very relevant to college students like the statements I do not

have much to be proud of and I work as well as others. The full survey is in Appendix A.

The Westside Test Anxiety Scale is also 10 item scale traditionally used to identify

students with anxiety impairment. It covers anxiety that can impair academic performance

(Driscoll, 2004). The score ranges from 1-5. This test will be used to evaluate the test/academic

anxiety of the subjects before, during, and after the exposure or non-exposure to nature. This

survey was chosen over others like it because the Westside Test Anxiety Scale addresses

academic anxiety not only by identifying stress, but by identifying implications of academic

stress that can be detrimental to academic performance, using more applicable information that is

certainly more relevant to undergraduates. The full survey is in Appendix B.

The Life Change Index Scale, also known as The Stress Test, assesses on a scale of

points, up to over 300, the amount of stressful change occurring in the life of an individual over a

period of time (Holmes, 1967). Those will scores reaching higher than 300 are 80% more likely

to experience unhealthy amounts of stress, and those with scores from 159-299 are 50% more

likely. Thus, individuals who score higher than 200 on this scale will be excluded from the

results assessed.

Hypothesis and Analysis:

RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 8

Based on the positive results of previous research regarding outdoor exposure found in

Nearby Nature (Wells, 2003) and ParticipationA Case Study (Vella, 2013), it is predicted that

members of the 2020 class randomly assigned to spend 15 minutes outside every day without

electronics will have a higher perception of self-worth, and lower scores in test-anxiety than

students in the control group.

To test this hypothesis, I will compare the mean change in assessment results from

before, during and after the experiment between the two groups. I will conduct a two-sample t-

test to determine if the two groups results are different and if the change between the groups is

significant. I will analyze the reported self-worth scores and the academic anxiety scores

separately seeing as I expect the self-worth to increase, and anxiety to decrease. Appendix D

shows an example of the expected results analyzed in this way.

Discussion:

A strength for this experiment is its controls in the population and the experimental

design. For example, the exclusion of varsity athletes that compete outdoors and, the additional

limitation in population to the freshman class of 2020 to control for maturity level and create a

diverse population pool. In the experiment, the controls accounted for include: requiring the 15

min sessions to be during daylight to create a uniform environment. Additionally, The Stress

Test administered at the final assessment allows for the control for outside stress inducing

variables: stressful life changes. This allows for the results to be as pure and quantitative as

possible. Also, the experiment inherentlyat least partlycontrols for variation in location

considering that the population is all Stanford students, freshman with busy schedules, it is to be

assumed that they will be spending their allotted time outdoors in similar places: The Polynesian

sculpture garden, the dish, Jasper Ridge. This creates less of a variation in natural environment
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 9

without forcing the participants to go to the same place every day, which could introduce

confounding variables related to monotony.

However, the variation in environment also introduces some weakness into the

experiment; the quality of nature may be significantly different from participant to participant.

While one student may venture to Jasper Ridge every day, another may choose the eucalyptus

grove right next to Campus Drive, not as isolated or immersive. An additional variation that

could be problematic is sunlight. Research has shown that differing levels of sunlight has a large

effect on mood (Lambert, 2002). So, even by excluding sunrise, sunset, and after nightfall, there

is still a possibility of a variation in mood due to variations in sunlight. However, similarly to the

reason there is no mandatory setting in which each session must be spent, there was intention

behind there not being a set time of day for the session either. The goal is to avoid making the

session each day a chore which could ultimately lead to stress by adding another obligation to

the schedule of a busy college student. Another weakness in the experiment has to do with self-

report and personality of the subjects. The first problem with this is the basic human error and

bias involved with self-report surveys. There is never a certain objectivity when surveys are

involved. This is a weakness, of course, but with the use of peer reviewed surveys to insure the

reliability and effectiveness of questions asked and encouraging unbiased responses by holding

the assessments in laboratory settings, this study hopes to minimize that weakness. The second

issue regarding bias is personal preference of the subjects. Some people just do not enjoy time

outdoors and may even experience stress while spending time with wildlife. This could skew

results slightly. Nevertheless, if the study is going to be representative of the entire class

population, then that would include those who do not prefer the outdoors, so it is an unavoidable

weakness.
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV 10

This study adds an important voice to the psychological research surrounding the

outdoors and nature. Psychological links have been drawn between outdoor/nature exposure and

better temperament or mental health (Vella, 2013), but the tangible effects found in

undergraduates has never been quantified. With this study, we are able to observe the causal link

between mental health and exposure to nature, in a population that is most susceptible and

vulnerable to stressful environmentsyoung adults leaving home for the first time. This research

can provide valuable insight into the benefits and therapeutic effects of spending time in nature,

and just how far those benefit reach. This can be useful information for undergraduates dealing

with stressful life events, or professors seeking more effective, less stressful learning and

teaching strategies.

Assuming the hypothesis is confirmed, there is plenty of opportunity for future study

regarding this topic. The Westside Anxiety Scale is designed to identify signs that may hinder

performance in academics, so if outdoor exposure can improve scores on this scale, then that is

an indicator that outdoor exposure could not only improve mental health regarding academics

but also improve academic performance itself. More inquiry into this link could be done.

Additionally, this study just scratched the surface of mental benefits for students that outdoor

relaxation can have; more research could be done on the quantifiable somatic benefits that the

outdoors may have on students such as sleep quality, or immune system strength.
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

References

Driscoll R. (2004). Westside Anxiety Scale Validation. American Test Anxiety Association, 1-6.

Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED495968.pdf

Holmes T.H. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale, Journal of Psychosomatic

Research. 213(11). Retrieved from:

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~eap/library/lifechangestresstest.pdf

Lambert, GW. (2002). Effect of sunlight and season on serotonin turnover in the brain. The

Lancet, 360(9), 1840-1842. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11737-5

Rosenberg M. (1965). Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Princeton University, 1-13. Retrieved from:

http://fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/Self_Measures_for_Se

lf-Esteem_ROSENBERG_SELF-ESTEEM.pdf

Vella E., & Milligan B. (2013). Participation in Outdoor Recreation Program Predicts Improved

Psychosocial Well-Being Among Veterans With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: A Pilot

Study. Military Medicine, 178(3), 254-262. doi:10.7205/MILMED-D-12-00308.

Wells, N. & Evans, G. (2003). Nearby Nature: A Buffer of Life Stress Among Rural Children.

Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 311-330. doi:10.1177/0013916503035003001

RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Appendix A
Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (Rosenburg, 1965)

Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself.
Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement.
1.On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
2.At times I think I am no good at all.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
3.I feel that I have a number of good qualities.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
4.I am able to do things as well as most other people
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
6. I certainly feel useless at times
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
7. I feel that I'm a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
8. I wish I could have more respect for myself.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Appendix B

Westside Test Anxiety Scale (Driscoll, 2004)

Rate how true each of the following is of you, from extremely or always true, to not at all or

never true.

Use the following 5 point scale:

5=extremely or always true

4=highly or usually true

3=moderately or sometimes true

2=slightly or seldom true

1=not at all or never true

__ 1) The closer I am to a major exam, the harder it is for me to concentrate on the material.

__ 2) When I study, I worry that I will not remember the material on the exam.

__ 3) During important exams, I think that I am doing awful or that I may fail.

__ 4) I lose focus on important exams, and I cannot remember material that I knew before the

exam.

__ 5) I finally remember the answer to exam questions after the exam is already over.

__ 6) I worry so much before a major exam that I am too worn out to do my best on the exam.

__ 7) I feel out of sorts or not really myself when I take important exams.

__ 8) I find that my mind sometimes wanders when I am taking important exams.

__ 9) After an exam, I worry about whether I did well enough.

__ 10) I struggle with writing assignments, or avoid them as long as I can. I feel that whatever I

do will not be good enough.

 RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Appendix C

The Social Readjustment Rating Scale

Directions: If an event mentioned below has occurred in the three weeks (the course of the
study), or is expected in the near future, copy the number in the score column. If the event has
occurred or is expected to occur more than once, multiply this number by the frequency of the
event.

Life Change Index Scale (The Stress Test)

Event Impact Score

My Score

Death of spouse 100

Divorce 73

Marital Separation 65

Jail Term 63

Death of close family member 63

Personal injury or illness 53

Marriage 50

Fired at work 47

Marital reconciliation 45

Retirement 45

Change in health of family member 44

Pregnancy 40

Sex difficulties 39
 RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Gain of a new family member 39

Business readjustment 39

Change in financial state 38

Death of a close friend 37

Change to a different line of work 36

Change in number of arguments with spouse 35

Mortgage over $20,000 31

Foreclosure of mortgage or loan 30

Change in responsibilities at work 29

Son or daughter leaving home 29

Trouble with in laws 29

Outstanding personal achievement 28

Spouse begins or stop work 26

Begin or end school 26

Change in living conditions 25

Revisions of personal habits 24

Trouble with boss 23

Change in work hours or conditions 20

Change in residence 20
 RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Change in schools 20

Change in recreations 19

Change in church activities 19

Change in social activities 19

Mortgage or loan less than $20,000 17

Change in sleeping habits 16

Change in number of family get-togethers 15

Change in eating habits 15

Vacation 13

Christmas approaching 12

Minor violation of the law 11

Total
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Appendix D

Sample graph of expected results

Expected Mean Results from Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale

4

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Before Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 After

Control Column1

Expected Mean Results from Westside Anxiety Scale

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
Before Week 1 Week 2 Week 3

Control Column1
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Research and Writing Project

Part II

Madeline Libbey

Stanford University
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Introduction

These studies seek to explore the benefits of spending time outside, in university

undergraduates. The relationship between test-anxiety, self-worth, and time spent with nature

each day will be experimentally analyzed, while the relationship between sleep quality and time

spent outdoors day-to-day will be observationally studied. Sleep quality, mental health and self

confidence, as well as academic anxiety are all very relevant and pressing issues to

undergraduate students, seeing as they all contribute to success and quality of life at a university.

These studies investigate these important topics with the hypothesis that exposure to nature and

being outside can help mitigate the negatives of these phenomena. On a college campus like

Stanford, it is easy to claim that the beautiful surroundings and active student body are conducive

to learning; these studies look to confirm those claims. In a study titled Nearby Nature, it was

shown that nature when close to home, can serve as a buffering variable for negative life

stressors (Wells, 2003, p. 311-313). These studies piggyback on the ideas fromNearby Nature

to see how nature can not only buffer negatives, but have a positive effect, specifically in

students. In another study titled, Participation in Outdoor Recreation Program Predicts

Improved Psychosocial Well-Being Among Veterans With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: A

Pilot Study, it was shown that participating in an organized outdoor excursion can improve

sleep quality (among other things) in veterans (Vella, 2013, p. 255). The correlational study seeks

to isolate and identify this relationship between being outdoors and sleep quality in a more day-

to-day setting, targeted at undergraduates.

 RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

Experimental Study Proposal

Summary: This experiment addresses the question of how academic anxiety and self worth is

affected by exposure to nature by comparing college students ratings of self worth and academic

anxiety after being exposed to nature 15 minutes each day for a month to a control group.

Participants: The participants will be randomly selected from the Stanford 2020 class, using a

random number generator selecting student identification numbers (SUID). We will exclude

students on varsity sports teams, because their proportion of time spent outdoors daily may skew

the results. The first 100 students will be selected for the experimental group, and the next 100

students will be the control group; this sample size is large enough to make claims about the

population (7,000 undergraduates), while also small enough to perform a two proportion t-test

200x20 < 7,000.

Procedures:

1) After obtaining the participant groups, we will first assess their individual status on the

Rosenberg self-esteem scale and the Westside Test Anxiety Scale in a lab setting.
2) The control group will go about their lives in a normal fashion after the initial survey.
3) The experimental group will be assigned to spend 15 mins every day for 3 weeks.
a) Preferably, but not mandatorily in an area with less people and more nature
i) Nature meaning: foliage, native plants and wildlife, less human activity
ii) No technology usage for these 15 mins
iii) While sun is up or setting/rising, not after sun down.
4) After three weeks both groups will be re-assessed individually in a lab setting.

Measures:

The dependant variables for this experiment are perceived self-worth, and test/academic

anxiety. These will be measured with The Rosenberg self-esteem scale, created by Rosenberg M.

of Princeton University and the Westside Test Anxiety Scale, created by Richard Driscoll PhD of

the American Test Anxiety Association.

RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

The Rosenberg self-esteem scale, described as A 10-item scale that measures global self-

worth by measuring both positive and negative feelings about the self. The scale is believed to be

unidimensional. All items are answered using a 4-point Likert scale format ranging from strongly

agree to strongly disagree(Rosenberg, 1965, p. 1) will be used to assess the perception of self-

worth of all participants before and after the exposure or non-exposure to nature.

The Westside Test Anxiety Scale is a brief, ten item instrument designed to identify

students with anxiety impairments who could benefit from an anxiety reduction intervention. The

scale items cover self-assessed anxiety impairment and cognitions which can impair

performance(Driscoll, 2004, p. 1). The score ranges from 1-5. This test will be used to evaluate

the test/academic anxiety of the subjects before and after the exposure or non-exposure to nature.

Hypothesis and Analysis:

I predict that members of the 2020 class randomly assigned to spend 15 minutes outside

every day without electronics will have a higher perception of self-worth, and lower scores in

test-anxiety than students in the control group.

To test this hypothesis, I will compare the mean percent change in assessment results

from before and after the experiment between the two groups. I will conduct a two-proportion t-

test to determine if the two groups are different and if the change between the groups is

significant. I will analyze the reported self-worth scores and the academic anxiety scores

separately seeing as I expect the self-worth to increase, and anxiety to decrease.

Discussion:

I think this experiment has a relatively strong design because it has many controls; the

surveys are conducted both before and after the experiment so we have a baseline measurement

as well as having an entire control group. The largest weakness in the experiment is controlling
RESEARCH AND WRITING PART IV

the amount of nature that the subjects are exposed to, the students may not be in a preserved

National Park for their 15 minutes each day, they could be in a small wooded area in a Palo Alto

suburb instead. These differences may be significant.