Bird song diversity influences young people's appreciation of urban landscapes

Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 469-474

  Hedblom, Marcus ^a,b   Heyman, Erik ^a   Antonsson, Henrik ^a   Gunnarsson, Bengt ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Green space; Passerines; Songbirds; Urban soundscape; Urban woodland

Indexed keywords

BIRD; GREENSPACE; LANDSCAPE; PERCEPTION; SONG; URBAN AREA;

ANIMALIA; AVES; CYANISTES CAERULEUS; DENDROCOPOS MAJOR; ERITHACUS RUBECULA; FRINGILLA; FRINGILLA COELEBS; PARUS MAJOR; PASSER DOMESTICUS; PASSERI; PHYLLOSCOPUS; PHYLLOSCOPUS TROCHILUS; SALIX; TURDUS MERULA;

EID: 84905732706     PISSN: 16188667     EISSN: 16108167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2014.04.002     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alvarsson J.J., Wiens S., Nilsson M.E. Recovery during exposure to nature sound and environmental noise. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2010, 7:1036-1046.
2. Annerstedt M. Nature and Public Health. Aspects of Promotion, Prevention, and Intervention 2011, 98:86. Acta Universitatis agriculturae Sueciae, (doctoral thesis).
3. Balter M. Evolution of language, animal communication helps reveal roots of language. Science 2010, 328:969-971.
4. Benfield J.A., Bell P.A., Troup L.J., Soderstrom N.C. Aesthetic and affective effects of vocal and traffic noise on natural landscape assessment. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30:103-111.
5. Bjerke T., Østdahl T. Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population. Anthrozoos 2004, 17:109-129.
6. Björk E.A. The perceived quality of natural sounds. Acustica 1985, 57:185-188.
7. Björk E.A. Laboratory annoyance and skin-conductance responses to some natural sounds. J. Sound Vib. 1986, 109:339-345.
8. Carles J.L., Barrio I.L., de Lucio J.V. Sound influence on landscape values. Landscape Urban Plan. 1999, 43:191-200.
9. Dallimer M., Irvine K.N., Skinner A.M.J., Davies Z.G., Rouquette J.R., Maltby L.L., Warren P.H., Armsworth P.R., Gaston K.J. Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. Bioscience 2012, 62:47-55.
10. Dean J., van Dooren K., Weinstein P. Does biodiversity improve mental health in urban settings?. Med. Hypotheses 2011, 76:877-880.
11. Fuller R.A., Irvine K.N., Devine-Wright P., Warren P.H., Gaston K.J. Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biol. Lett. 2007, 3:390-394.
12. Fuller R.A., Gaston K.J. The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biol. Lett. 2009, 5:352-355.
13. Grahn P., Stigsdotter U.K. Landscape planning and stress. Urban Forest. Urban Green. 2003, 2:1-18.
14. Hedblom M., Söderström B. Landscape effects on birds in urban woodlands: an analysis of 34 Swedish cities. J. Biogeogr. 2010, 3:1302-1316.
15. Heyman E. Clearance of understory in urban woodlands: assessing impact on bird abundance and diversity. Forest Ecol. Manage. 2010, 260:125-131.
16. Heyman E., Gunnarsson B. Management effect on bird and arthropod interaction in suburban woodlands. BMC Ecol. 2011, 11:8. 10.1186/1472-6785-11-8.
17. Hougner C., Colding J., Söderqvist T. Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 59:364-374.
18. Irvine K.N., Devine-Wright P., Payne S.R., Fuller R.A., Painter B., Gaston K.J. Green space, soundscape and urban sustainability: an interdisciplinary, empirical study. Local Environ. 2009, 14:155-172.
19. James P., et al. Towards an integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment. Urban Forest. Urban Green. 2009, 8:65-76.
20. Jarvis E.D. Learned birdsong and the neurobiology of human language. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004, 1016:749-777.
21. Kaplan S. The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 1995, 16:169-182.
22. Luck G.W., Davidson P., Boxall D., Smallbone L. Relations between urban bird and plant communities and human well-being and connection to nature. Conserv. Biol. 2011, 25:816-826.
23. Lailo P. The emerging significance of bioacoustics in animal species conservation. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143:1635-1645.
24. Mörtberg U., Wallentinus H.G. Red-listed forest bird species in an urban environment - assessment of green space corridors. Landscape Urban Plan. 2000, 50:215-226.
25. Payne S.R. The production of a Perceived Restorativeness Soundscape Scale. Appl. Acoust. 2013, 74:255-263.
26. Seto K.C., Güneralp B., Hutyra L.R. Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109:16083-16088.
27. Siegel S., Castellan N.J. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences 1988, McGraw-Hill, New York. 2nd ed.
28. Taylor L., Taylor C., Davis A. The impact of urbanisation on avian species: the inextricable link between people and birds. Urban Ecosyst. 2013, 16:481-498.
29. Ulrich R. View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science 1984, 224:420-421.
30. Viollon S., Lavandier C., Drake C. Influence of visual setting on sound ratings in an urban environment. Appl. Acoust. 2002, 63:493-511.
31. Ward Thompson C., Roe J., Aspinall P., Mitchell R., Clow A., Miller D. More green space is linked to less stress in deprived communities: evidence from salivary cortisol patterns. Landscape Urban Plan. 2012, 105:221-229.
32. Wenny D.G., DeVault T.L., Johnson M.D., Kelly D., Sekercioglu C.H., Tomback D.F., Whelan C.J. The need to quantify ecosystem services provided by birds. Auk 2011, 128:1-14.
33. White M.P., Alcock I., Wheeler B.W., Depledge M.H. Would you be happier living in a greener urban area? A fixed-effects analysis of panel data. Psychol. Sci. 2013, 24:920-928.