Nature Sound ~REPACK~ Download
Terresa Beckley
Earth.fm is a non-profit, growing library of 700+ immersive natural soundscapes from all over the world. Inspired by the life-changing teachings of Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh, our aspiration is to help each other wake up to the miracle of Mother Earth and do everything in our power to support her.
Listen to any episode from the archive or explore the frequently asked questions below.
I am looking for a mod that adds ambient sounds to biomes like birds chirping, wind, and separate nighttime ambiance like crickets and things. It must be noticeable and not so subtle you don't hear anything aside from a single bird or an own hooting once every 10-30 seconds. I really want to add some immersion to my cozy creative build world. Must be for forge (or an addon) and has to be for Java. Obviously. (Seriously, most decent results i get are for PE.)
They are for relaxation/hypnosys test and it is very important that they blend in extremely well so none feels overpowering any other. That is very important to help relaxation and avoid getting distracted by unexpected sound/volume bursts/changes.
Attention restoration theory (ART) posits that stimuli found in nature may restore directed attention functioning by reducing demands on the endogenous attention system. In the present experiment, we assessed whether nature-related cognitive benefits extended to auditory presentations of nature, a topic that has been understudied. To assess directed attention, we created a composite measure consisting of a backward digit span task and a dual n-back task. Participants completed these cognitive measures and an affective questionnaire before and after listening to and aesthetically judging either natural or urban soundscapes (between-participants). Relative to participants who were exposed to urban soundscapes, we observed significant improvements in cognitive performance for individuals exposed to nature. Urban soundscapes did not systematically affect performance either adversely or beneficially. Natural sounds did not differentially change positive or negative affect, despite these sounds being aesthetically preferred to urban sounds. These results provide initial evidence that brief experiences with natural sounds can improve directed attention functioning in a single experimental session.
The psychological benefits of interacting with nature have been discussed for well over a century (e.g., Olmsted, 1993), with research over the past few decades assessing how interactions with nature specifically may benefit cognition and cognitive development (e.g., Bratman, Hamilton, & Daily, 2012). For example, the extent of available green space has been positively associated with the development of executive functions in children, even after controlling for factors such as socioeconomic status (Dadvand et al., 2015). Even brief interventions in which participants take a walk through nature or view nature images on a computer screen have been shown to improve the functioning of directed attention relative to interventions in which participants are exposed to more urban environments (Berman, Jonides, & Kaplan, 2008).
One prominent account of how nature may improve aspects of cognition is attention restoration theory (ART), which posits that nature environments are particularly well-suited for reducing demands on the endogenous attention system, thereby allowing subsequent restoration of attentional functioning (e.g., Kaplan, 1995). The fact that simply viewing pictures of nature environments can improve performance on tasks requiring directed attention (Berman et al., 2008) suggests that nature, in part, may improve performance through the visual features that differentiate natural and urban scenes (see Berman et al., 2014), which may engage attentional mechanisms in a manner that restores directed attention. However, the focus on visual depictions of nature in the ART literature has resulted in a relative paucity of research on other modalities, such as audition. As such, the present experiment tests whether auditory representations of nature confer similar benefits to directed-attention functioning.
Beyond ART, two broad research findings support potential cognitive benefits from experiencing nature sounds. First, prior studies have demonstrated widespread associations between noise levels and health. Noise pollution (e.g., urban environmental noises with sustained, high-amplitudes) has been associated with greater amounts of reported stress and distraction (e.g., de Paiva Vianna, Cardoso, & Rodrigues, 2015), which can lead to chronic learning and attention problems (see Hammer, Swinburn, & Neitzel, 2014). Thus, natural sounds may improve aspects of cognition relative to urban sounds because these two classes of sounds generally differ with respect to their amplitude in the real world (see McDonald et al., 1995), with nature sounds being thought to provide a quiet respite from urban environments (Mace, Bell, & Loomis, 2004). In this kind of framework, however, nature sounds may not confer any cognitive benefits relative to urban sounds when presented at the same amplitude.
A second reason why natural sounds may improve cognitive functioning is captured by stress reduction theory (SRT; Ulrich, 1983). SRT asserts that the aesthetic and affective value of experiences with nature can lower stress levels, which may in turn benefit cognitive performance. In support of SRT, natural sounds have been shown to reduce physiological symptoms of stress and improve affect (e.g., Alvarsson, Wiens, & Nilsson, 2010; Benfield, Taff, Newman, & Smyth, 2014; Ulrich et al., 1991), and, moreover, certain classes of natural sounds (birdsong) are perceived to both lower stress and restore attention (e.g., Ratcliffe, Gatersleben, & Sowden, 2013). Thus, nature-related benefits to cognitive functioning are compatible with both ART and SRT, though under SRT one would expect cognitive benefits to be a consequence of affective changes.
The present experiment provides a more direct test of whether randomly assigning participants to hear nature versus urban soundscapes improves the functioning of directed attention. In line with previous work from the visual domain (e.g., Berman et al., 2008; Berto, 2005; Bourrier, Berman, & Enns, 2018), the primary hypothesis was that brief experiences with nature sounds, relative to urban sounds, will result in performance improvements on cognitive tasks requiring directed attention.
To address whether any nature-related cognitive improvements could be explained by affective changes, which would be predicted under SRT, participants provided aesthetic ratings of the sounds they heard as well as rated their positive and negative affect before and after the sound intervention. Aesthetic judgments have been interpreted as an affective response in the context of SRT (Ulrich, 1983), and previous investigations of nature-related cognitive benefits in vision have examined how aesthetic ratings of experienced nature relate to cognitive improvements (Berman et al., 2008).
Given that prior research has established that nature stimuli are aesthetically preferred to urban stimuli (e.g., Kaplan, Kaplan, & Wendt, 1972; Kardan et al., 2015) and that experiences with nature can improve positive affect and reduce negative affect (e.g., Benfield et al., 2014; Bratman, Daily, Levy, & Gross, 2015), we hypothesized that, relative to urban sounds, nature sounds will: (1) be aesthetically preferred, (2) increase positive affect, and (3) decrease negative affect. Importantly, however, under SRT these aesthetic and affective changes should significantly relate to any observed cognitive improvements. Thus, there are two overarching aims of this work. The first aim is to assess whether nature sounds can improve aspects of cognitive performance. The second aim is to ground any observed nature-related cognitive benefits in the context of either ART or SRT.
The experiment adopted a 2 (time: pre-intervention, post-intervention) x 2 (soundscape: natural, urban) mixed factorial design, with time as the within-participant factor and soundscape as the randomly-assigned, between-participant factor.
After providing written consent, participants completed the PANAS, BDS, and DNB in this order. These pre-intervention assessments took approximately 20 minutes to complete. Participants then heard 40 natural or urban soundscapes, depending on the condition to which they were randomly assigned. This portion of the experiment took approximately 15 min to complete. Following the natural or urban sound exposure, participant retook the PANAS, BDS, and DNB in this order. Finally, participants filled out a brief questionnaire, which collected basic demographic information as well as required participants to write down their thoughts as to the purpose of the study, as well as whether they had participated in any similar study.
Natural soundscapes were aesthetically preferred over urban soundscapes (Full: t (61) = 5.61, p < .001, d = 1.41, BF = 2.41e4; Naïve: t (44) = 4.65, p < .001, d = 1.38, BF = 610.2). For all 63 participants, the mean rating of natural soundscapes was 2.31 (SD = 0.37) and the mean rating of urban soundscapes was 1.84 (SD = 0.28). For the subset of 46 naïve participants, the mean rating of natural soundscapes was 2.23 (SD = 0.41) and the mean rating of urban soundscapes was 1.82 (SD = 0.29).
For negative affect (NA), there was also a main effect of time (Full: F (1, 61) = 9.73, p = .003, d = 0.39, BF = 9.87; Naïve: F (1, 44) = 9.74, p = .003, d = 0.44, BF = 8.36), characterized by overall lower scores post-intervention compared to pre-intervention. However, the main effect of soundscape type (Full: F (1, 61) = 0.39, p = .536, d = 0.16, BF = 0.52; Naïve: F (1, 44) = 0.77, p = .386, d = 0.26, BF = 0.61), in addition to the interaction between time and soundscape type (Full: F (1, 61) = 2.50, p = .119, d = 0.40, BF = 0.71; Naïve: F (1, 44) = 1.45, p = .235, d = 0.36, BF = 0.50), was not significant for either the full or the naïve group of participants.
df19127ead