景觀環境中植物偏好機制與影響因素研究

Abstract

隨著都市化進程加速，土地利用型態與人居空間高度人工化，現代人與自然環境的日常接觸逐漸稀少，如何在有限的城市空間中有效融入自然元素，進而增進居民的心理福祉與環境滿意度，成為景觀規劃與設計的重要課題。在此脈絡下，人類對於自然，特別是植物的偏好機制，長期以來一直是環境心理學與景觀學領域關注的焦點。然而，過去關於植物偏好的討論多停留在演化理論與恢復性理論等框架下，缺乏針對植物自身特性對偏好影響的系統性驗證。有鑑於此，本研究從演化心理學、恢復性理論及社會文化學習等多重理論觀點切入，嘗試回應當前理論與實務之間的落差，進一步探討影響人類對植物偏好的核心機制。文獻指出，親生命假說與稀樹草原假說主張，人類傾向偏好能提供生存資源與庇護的自然環境，而恢復性理論則強調無威脅的自然場景有助於壓力恢復與注意力恢復。但隨著人造植物、仿真綠意及虛擬自然技術的興起，「真實植物是否真有不可取代性？」「植物具體的生存功能與真實性，是否真的能被人類感知並反映在偏好上？」這些問題仍待實證檢驗。 為填補上述研究缺口，本研究設計了三個子研究，透過問卷調查與情境模擬實驗，檢驗植物特性與真實性對人類偏好的影響。首先，研究一聚焦於植物生存功能，選取果實、花朵及荊棘三類具代表性的特徵作為操作變項，探討不同資源特性與潛在威脅性對人類的環境偏好及其他感知的影響。研究二則進一步比較真實植物與外觀相同的仿真植物，檢驗在心理效益與偏好上是否存在顯著差異。研究三則在前述基礎上納入資訊真實性，在實際環境中進行實驗，探討當真實與仿真植物搭配不同環境資訊時，是否會因標籤作用而產生安慰劑效應，進而影響偏好反應與其他心理感知。 本研究結果顯示，植物的生存功能對偏好確實存在顯著影響，象徵著資源供應性的特徵（如無毒果實、真實花朵）能顯著提升受測者對環境的喜好程度與在居住地看見的意願，同時降地對潛在危險的感知；而帶有危險性的特徵（如有毒果實、荊棘）則顯著降低偏好與增加風險感受。研究也發現，主觀植物真實度與植物資訊的標籤都有可能對偏好產生影響，研究二中，若只有資訊的狀況下，單純的真偽標示對偏好影響有限，受測者根據其主觀感受來判斷偏好。研究三則在比較真實植物與仿真植物的基礎上，進一步操控真偽資訊，形成「植物真偽×告知資訊」的雙因子設計。結果顯示，人們確實受到標籤資訊的影響，無論當下觀看的是真實植物或仿真植物，只要其獲得真實資訊的標籤，偏好度就會比仿真資訊標籤還高。這與消費心理學中「天然產品偏好」的現象相呼應，說明植物偏好可能並非單純的演化本能反應，亦受到社會文化學習與認知框架的共同形塑。本研究在理論上補充了演化理論與恢復性理論的不足，驗證植物具體特性在偏好形成中的作用，並發現標籤效應與安慰劑效應可能是調節偏好的心理路徑之一。在實務層面，研究結果可作為都市景觀設計、人居健康促進與綠化政策擬定的依據，協助設計者更有效整合真實植物與模擬植栽的配置策略，回應現代人對自然的多元需求。

With the accelerating pace of urbanization, land use patterns and living environments have become highly artificial, leading to a significant reduction in people's daily contact with nature. How to effectively integrate natural elements into limited urban spaces to enhance residents’ psychological well-being and environmental satisfaction has become a critical issue in landscape planning and design. Against this backdrop, the mechanisms underlying human preference for nature—particularly plants—have long been a focal point in environmental psychology and landscape studies. However, previous discussions on plant preference have largely centered around evolutionary theories and restorative theories, lacking systematic empirical validation of how the characteristics of plants themselves influence human preference. To address this gap, this study adopts a multi-theoretical perspective—drawing from evolutionary psychology, restorative theory, and sociocultural learning—to bridge the divide between theory and practice, and to further explore the core mechanisms shaping plant preference. Literature suggests that the biophilia hypothesis and the savanna hypothesis argue humans prefer environments that offer survival resources and shelter, while restorative theory emphasizes the role of non-threatening natural settings in alleviating stress and restoring attention. Yet, with the rise of artificial plants, simulated greenery, and virtual nature technologies, questions such as “Are real plants truly irreplaceable?” and “Can humans genuinely perceive and reflect a plant’s survival functionality and authenticity in their preferences?” remain to be empirically tested. To address these questions, this study conducted three sub-studies using surveys and scenario-based experiments to examine the effects of plant characteristics and realness on human preference. Study 1 focused on survival-related plant traits, selecting three representative features—fruits, flowers, and thorns—as manipulated variables to explore how resource-related and threat-related traits influence environmental preference and related perceptions. Study 2 compared real plants with visually identical artificial ones to investigate whether there are significant differences in psychological benefits and preference. Building on the previous studies, Study 3 introduced the variable of information and conducted field experiments to examine whether labeling effects induce placebo responses that influence preference and psychological perception when real or artificial plants are paired with different types of information. The results show that survival-related plant features significantly influence preference. Features symbolizing resource availability (e.g., edible fruits, real flowers) notably enhanced participants’ environmental preference and willingness to see such plants in their living spaces, while reducing perceived risk. In contrast, features indicating danger (e.g., poisonous fruits, thorns) significantly lowered preference and increased risk perception. The studies also found that both perceived plant authenticity and informational labeling can affect preference. In Study 2, when only the information was manipulated, the preference was not significantly affected by real or artificial labeling alone—participants relied more on their subjective perceptions. However, in Study 3, under a 2×2 factorial design (Plant Real/Fake × Labeling Information), results showed a significant labeling effect: regardless of whether participants viewed a real or artificial plant, those labeled as "real" were preferred over those labeled as "artificial." This aligns with phenomena in consumer psychology, such as the preference for natural products, suggesting that plant preference is not purely an innate evolutionary response but is also shaped by sociocultural learning and cognitive framing. Theoretically, this research supplements the limitations of evolutionary and restorative theories by empirically validating the role of specific plant traits in shaping preference and revealing that labeling and placebo effects may serve as psychological pathways influencing preference formation. Practically, the findings offer insights for urban landscape design, health-promoting environments, and greening policy development, aiding practitioners in strategically integrating real and simulated greenery to meet contemporary demands for nature in urban life.