1,2,4 College of Nursing, Visayas State University, Leyte, 6521 Philippines
3 College of Arts and Sciences, Northeastern Mindanao Colleges, Surigao City, 8400 Philippines
*Corresponding Authors Email: janetalexis.delossantos@vsu.edu.ph
Results: Results revealed that gardeners have considerably higher reports of good health (M=3.40, SD=0.48), higher resilience (M=3.82, SD=0.51) and displayed significantly higher reports of coping (M=3.82, SD=0.56) than non-gardeners. Non-gardeners on the other hand showed to be more fearful of COVID-19 than the gardener group (M=3.26, SD=0.63).
Keywords: Gardening; Fear of COVID-19; Perceived Health; Resilience; Bereavement Coping; Psychological Well-Being; Philippines
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought dramatic loss of human life in all facets most especially in terms of health. True in today’s health, are the mental and physical stress caused by the fear to COVID-19 and lockdown, and fatigue from the prolonged community-wide restrictions. Additionally, there are reports of stressful life events. People are facing numerous challenges in this present time such as unstable work, loss of jobs and incomes, isolation and anxiety, and feelings of loss and bereavement following the death of a loved one (Ahrens et al., 2021; Pietrabissa & Simpson, 2020). Undeniably these are contributory factors to mental stress while exacerbating the existing ones. As a result, people try to cope this situation through activities that were considered safe.
Gardening activities and its benefits has always been thought to be a relaxing recreational activity especially in this time of pandemic (Theodorou et al., 2021). Not only does it provide a source for consumption, but studies also found this nature-based activity as a catalyst for enhancing social engagement and positive behaviors and healthier lifestyle (Dietz, 2012; Janke et al., 2008). Gardening was integrated as a positive family-inclusive activity to adopt and cope mentally in the pandemic. Growing plants and vegetables in their own gardens have fostered family's creativity to express their boredom and find sense of security and fulfillment especially when health restrictions were implemented.
The healthcare community began to integrate healing therapies through gardening to facilitate it as a complementary therapy in addition to conventional ones (Soga et al., 2017; Thompson, 2018). Horticultural therapies has become popular form of rehabilitation especially in nursing and occupational therapy (Mizuno-Matsumoto et al., 2008). The involvement in gardening and exposure to green spaces have shown positive effects to patients suffering from depression and anxiety, cardiovascular diseases, obesity and diabetes, and neurovascular disease (Beyer et al., 2014; Lachowycz & Jones, 2012; Maas et al., 2009; Mizuno-Matsumoto et al., 2008). Moreover, there are scholars who promoted the integration of green activities in coping for loss, self-healing, and recovery from grief (Machado & Swank, 2019).
While there is increasing studies on gardening benefits on a person’s subjective health and well-being, very few studies tried to establish its difference among those who do not engage to these activities. This present study took the opportunity to determine the benefits of gardening to health and well-being among the general population during time of pandemic. To assess the difference of the two groups, the following is hypothesized:
H1: There is no significant difference between the gardener and non-gardener group in terms of:
Health
Fear of COVID-19
Perceived Stress
Resilience
Bereavement and Loss Coping
This study is a quantitative, comparative research utilizing a quasi-experimental non-equivalent post-test only group research design.
The overall respondents of the study composed of 400 respondents which were divided into two: the gardener and non-gardener with equal number of participants at 200 samples per group. The participants for the gardener group were recruited using convenience method bounded on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria includes: (1) legal age; (2) owns a garden in home setting for more than 6 months, (3) has lost a loved one within the past four years and is (4) willing to participate. To minimize possible bias, individuals who does gardening for a living was excluded. All participants were aged 18years and above. On the other hand, the inclusion criteria for the non-gardener group includes: (1) legal age, (2) does not own a garden at home, (4) has lost a significant other or a loved one within the past four years, and is (3) willing to participate. Excluded are those who have family members who are into gardening.
The researchers utilized standardized scales to gather the needed data. The following tools were used in assessing the participants health and well-being.
Fear of COVID-19 Scale. The FCV was a scale used to assess and examine participant’s fears to COVID-19. This tool composed of a 7-item Likert scale, with a 5-point scoring system described as “strongly disagree,” “disagree,” “neutral” “agree” and “strongly agree”. The possible lowest score is 1 and highest score of 5 for each item. The internal consistency test shown a value of =0.82 and test-retest reliability (ICC=0.72) (Ahorsu et al., 2020).
Health Orientation Scale. To assess the participants’ health, the Health Orientation Scale particularly the perceived health status scale was utilized. Originally, the scale is composed of a 5-Point Likert-scale system scored and described as 1=“not at all characteristic of me” to 5= “every characteristic of me.” The adapted version made for the study composed of 5-item scale focusing on the perceived health status subscale. The subscale has an acceptable internal consistency value of α=0.79 (Snell et al., 2013).
Perceived Stress Scale. The perceived stress scale was utilized to determine the respondents’ perceived stress. The tool was originally designed to measure the degree of condition of past events to which respondents perceived it as a stressful event. The scale is composed of 10 item scale in a 5-point system Likert scale from 1=“never,” to 5= “very often”. The scale showed acceptable internal consistency based on the Crobnach’s =0.78 (Cohen and Williamson, 1998).
Brief Resilience Scale. The Brief Resilience Scale was used to determine the participant’s ability to recover from tension and stress. The scale is consisting of 6-items in a 5-point Likert scale where the participants can score based on agreement. The scoring is between 1 to 5 described as “strongly disagree” and “strongly agree” respectively. The scale has an internal consistency value of =0.69.
Coping Assessment for Bereavement and Loss Experiences. This scale was used to assess the specific coping strategies to bereavement and loss experiences of the participants. The scale presents a good reliability score of α=0.80 (Crunk et al., 2017). The scale is composed of 11- items using a 5-pont Likert scoring system. The participants were made to choose their level of agreement based on the following descriptors: 1 (strongly disagree), 2 (disagree), 3 (Neutral), 4 (agree), and 5 (strongly agree).
For the present study, all scales were able to display adequate to excellent internal consistency based on the Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.86, 0.72, 0.94, 0.98, and 0.98 respectively.
This study was ethically reviewed and approved by the Visayas State University College of Nursing Research Review Committee and was assigned a code:RES-CON-S2020.08 dated March 8, 2021. Data gathering was initiated after obtaining ethical clearance. This was facilitated by the use of both online and printed questionnaires. Due to restrictions in force for COVID-19, initially online data collection was done. A web survey link was sent to the selected participants messenger app or emails. To reach the desired target samples, the researchers went to other districts without internet access and distributed printed questionnaires. The researchers ensured the validity of the participants by observing the selection criteria and counter checking the initially gathered online participants.
The data was collated and organized using the SPSS version 23 software. The data was analyzed using Descriptive statistics such as frequency, means and standard deviations to examine and present the demographic attributes of the respondents.
To answer the hypothesis of this study, unpaired T-test was done to determine the presence of differences between the two unrelated groups. Unpaired T-test or also called as independent t- test is a type of t-test that uses the mean or average of two independent or unrelated groups to compare both group if they have significant differences. It helped in testing the null hypothesis and determine if the alternative hypothesis of the study is true. Cohen’s D was also used to determine for the magnitude of difference in variables between two groups
Table 1 presents the profile of the participants. A total of 400 respondent participated, with 200 for each group were identified as gardeners and non-gardeners. Gardener characteristics include majority between 21-30 years old. Results revealed that majority of the gardeners were female (61.5%), aging 21-40 years old (53%) married (47%), has finished undergraduate studies (69%) and are self-employed (66%). Meanwhile, the non-gardeners were also female (50.5%), aging between 21-40 years old (73.5%), and are single (68.5%), most were students (47.5%) on their college years (91%).
Table 1: Demographic Profile
VARIABLES | GARDENING (N=200) | NON-GARDENING (N=200) | ||
f | % | f | % | |
Age | ||||
20 and below | 11 | 5.5 | 28 | 14.0 |
21-40 | 106 | 53 | 147 | 73.5 |
41-60 | 63 | 31.5 | 25 | 12.5 |
61 and above | 20 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
Total | 200 | 100.0 | 200 | 100.0 |
Gender | ||||
Bisexual | 2 | 1.0 | 6 | 3 |
Female | 123 | 61.5 | 101 | 50.5 |
Gay | 9 | 4.5 | 13 | 6.5 |
Lesbian | 7 | 3.5 | 0 | 0 |
Male | 59 | 29.5 | 80 | 40 |
Total | 200 | 100.0 | 200 | 100.0 |
Marital Status | ||||
Single | 85 | 42.5 | 137 | 68.5 |
Married | 94 | 47 | 52 | 26 |
Separated | 8 | 4.0 | 0 | 0 |
Widow | 13 | 6.5 | 11 | 5.5 |
Total | 200 | 100.0 | 200 | 100.0 |
Education | ||||
Elementary | 28 | 14.0 | 0 | 0 |
High-School | 35 | 17.5 | 13 | 6.5 |
College | 69 | 34.5 | 182 | 91.0 |
Post-graduate | 68 | 34.0 | 5 | 2.5 |
Total | 200 | 100.0 | 200 | 100.0 |
Employment | ||||
Employed full- time | 32 | 16.0 | 64 | 32.0 |
Employed part- time | 12 | 6.0 | 1 | 0.5 |
Retired | 21 | 10.5 | 7 | 3.5 |
Seeking | 14 | 7.0 | 7 | 3.5 |
Opportunities/Unemployed | ||||
Self-employed | 66 | 33.0 | 26 | 13 |
Student | 55 | 22.5 | 95 | 47.5 |
Total | 200 | 100.0 | 200 | 100.0 |
Table 2 presents the results of the independent sample test between the two groups. Among the key five key variables in the study, only stress did not show significant difference between the two groups. It revealed that gardeners have considerably higher reports of good health (M=3.40, SD=0.48) as compared the non-gardeners (M=3.07, SD=0.40), t(398)= -7.583, p=0.001), with an effect size of 0.6875. Similarly, fear of COVID-19 was expressively higher in non-gardeners (M=3.26.SD=0.63) as compared to gardeners (M=2.67, SD=0.82), t (398)=8.168, p=<0.001) with an effect size of 0.7195. Moreover, it was found that gardeners have significantly higher resilience (M=3.82, SD=0.51) than their counterparts (M=3.17, SD=0.48), t (398)= -13.419, p=<0.001) and effect size of 1.2745. Finally, results found notable difference in terms of bereavement coping between gardeners and non-gardeners as the former displayed significantly higher reports of coping (M=3.82, SD=0.56) than non-gardeners (M=3.31, SD=0.46), t(398)= -9.915, p=<0.001) with an effect size of 0.9107.
Table 2: Independent Sample Test
Key variables | Mea n | SD. | t | df | p | Mean Differ ence | SE Differ ence | 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference | Glass’s d | ||
Lower | Upper | ||||||||||
Fear of Covid 19 | A | 2.67 | 0.82 | 8.168 | 398 | <0.001 | 0.59 | 0.073 | 0.453 | 0.741 | 0.7195 |
B | 3.26 | 0.63 | |||||||||
Health | A | 3.40 | 0.48 | -7.583 | 398 | <0.001 | -0.33 | 0.044 | -0.421 | -0.248 | 0.6875 |
B | 3.07 | 0.40 | |||||||||
Perceiv ed stress | A | 3.14 | 0.39 | -0.875 | 398 | 0.382 | -0.03 | 0.041 | -0.116 | 0.044 | 0.1025 |
B | 3.10 | 0.43 | |||||||||
Resilie nce | A | 3.82 | 0.51 | -13.149 | 398 | <0.001 | -0.65 | 0.049 | -0.754 | -0.558 | 1.2745 |
B | 3.17 | 0.48 | |||||||||
Bereav ement and Loss Coping | A | 3.82 | 0.56 | -9.915 | 398 | <0.001 | -0.50 | 0.051 | -0.607 | -0.406 | 0.9107 |
B | 3.31 | 0.46 |
A - gardener
B - Non-gardener
Based on these results hypothesis H1 A, B, D and E was rejected respectively as it failed to show significant difference in our analysis.
This study aimed to determine differences between gardener and non-gardeners in terms of their health and psychological well-being. It was hypothesized that there are no variances concerning the two groups in terms of health, fear of covid-19, perceived stress, resilience and bereavement coping.
The results revealed that gardeners perceived their health status way better than non-gardeners based on the significant difference in their mean scores. Results of the present study showed that the difference in terms of health among these groups suggests that gardening is beneficial to a person’s perception on their general sense of health. This result is similar to the growing literature on the claims of various scholars on how gardening reduces stress, improves health and life satisfaction. This result is similar to that of the meta-analysis study of Soga et al. (2016), who revealed that gardeners had better health than non-gardeners. Similarly, the literature discussed how gardens and gardening help improve a persons’ holistic self (Howarth et al., 2020). Similarly, outcomes of the study of Machado & Swank (2019), have shown a substantial benefit of communal gardening and the formation of healthy habits which encompasses daily engagement in physical activities. Additionally, there are reports that involvement in rural community gardening provides health-related advantages, including physical, nutritional, social, and psychological benefits (Sanchez & Liamputtong, 2016). These reports suggested that the act of gardening can be translated to healthy habits such as frequent exercises, conscious eating of nutritious foods, and increase in societal interaction. When a person is engaged in such, they are better able to demonstrate promising and favorable connections in the community through healthy lifestyle as compared to those who are not into gardening.
Moreover, it was found that non-gardeners fear the COVID-19 as compared to the gardener group. This study is the first to present the finding on the difference between those engaged in green activities and those who are not. Although there is a scarce literature to support this claim, nevertheless, gardening is found to improve a person’s coping in this time of the pandemic (Rhaman et al., 2020). Factors, including uncertainty on its transmissibility, viral mutations, and discrepancies on the effectiveness of available vaccines have heightened public fear towards COVID-19 (Rodríguez-Rey et al., 2020). It can be surmised that e coping is enhanced by the effect of gardening, gardeners are able to deal on their fear towards covid-19 more positively.
Another relevant finding from this study is the difference in resilience between the gardener and non-gardener groups. Based on the analysis it was found that gardeners are more resilient than their counterparts. This finding is similar to the study of Koay & Dillon (2020), who found optimism and increased resilience among those who engaged in community gardening. Gardening engages a person with the natural environment and helps in boosting their physical and mental health. These benefits primarily contribute in regaining stress from mental fatigue, and acts as a safeguard for future stressful events. Resilience is improved when a person engages in doing gardening activities because it evokes feelings of calmness and pleasure which is conducive for stress restoration. For instance, literature discussed the embracing of the environment through gardening-related activities act as a form of therapy which aids in addressing depression and self-improvement (Beyer et al., 2014; Clatworthy et al., 2013). Other scholars have likewise discussed the role of gardening helped in building personal resilience during life crisis situation and the pandemic and its effect on psychological distress and lockdown exhaustion (Camps-Calvet et al., 2021).
Finally, the study was able to find the difference between the two groups in terms of their bereavement and loss coping. Their mean scores suggested that gardeners cope better than the non-gardeners. Bereavement is known to be associated with psychological distress (Chirinos et al., 2018, Prior et al., 2017) and is essential to be given attention especially that the pandemic adds another challenge. The results supported the growing studies on the restorative effect of gardening towards a persons’ therapeutic coping of grief. Gardening is beneficial because of the wide range of health outcomes including reduction of stress, apprehension and angst, mood stabilizing effects, encouraging exercise, and improving a person’s sense of belongingness (Machado & Swank, 2019; Soga et al., 2016)
This study has several limitations. First, the use of convenience sampling in the selection of samples is not without bias. Future researchers are encouraged to utilize a more sophisticated participant selection to minimize selection biases. Secondly, there may be other factors that could explain the difference between the two groups which were not considered in the analysis used in this study. It is therefore suggested to utilize data analysis procedure that would look into this variance.
Based on the findings of this present study, important implications that can be established. First, gardening is a form of horticultural therapy for patients that may help in improving a person’s perceptions of health and psychological well-being. Likewise, it would also be beneficial to both patients and health care provider to integrate these restorative effects of gardening as a complementary therapy since it is natural and cost effective. As most findings focus on building resilience despite adversities, this paper channels a positive outlook in life. In stressful situations or health crises such as pandemic, gardening has been found to have an impact in reducing stress, improving resilience and building up coping. Gardening may be introduced as a means to further improve physical and mental health. Plant cultivation during this pandemic may help people to improve their physical and mental health through means of stress and anxiety reduction brought by fear to COVID-19. Gardening activity can uplift the quality of life through forming healthy practices such as involving in physical activities which may contribute to an improved state of health and well-being.
Gardening activity is beneficial in maintaining a person’s perceived health and well-being especially in times of distress and social isolation. People who engage in gardening activities are better in adapting to change, making them more resilient and increase the ability to adjust with grief and loss of a loved one. It is recommended to incorporate gardening as an adaptive means in improving the public’s health and well-being especially at times of health crises.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.
The authors would like to thank the participants for sharing their valuable time in participating in this study. Likewise, the authors are thankful to the different Local Government Units for the assistance provided during the data gathering.
Ahorsu, D. K., Lin, C. Y., Imani, V., Saffari, M., Griffiths, M. D., & Pakpour, A. H. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: development and initial validation. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1–9.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8
Ahrens, K. F., Neumann, R. J., Kollmann, B., Plichta, M. M., Lieb, K., Tüscher, O., & Reif, A. (2021). Differential impact of COVID-related lockdown on mental health in Germany. World Psychiatry: Official Journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 20(1), 140– 141. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20830
Beyer, K. M., Kaltenbach, A., Szabo, A., Bogar, S., Nieto, F. J., & Malecki, K. M. (2014). Exposure to neighborhood green space and mental health: evidence from the survey of the health of Wisconsin. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(3), 3453–3472. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110303453
Camps-Calvet M., Langemeyer J., Calvet-Mir L., Gómez-Baggethun E., & March H. (2015). Sowing Resilience and Contestation in Times of Crises: The Case of Urban Gardening Movements in Barcelona. Partecipazione E Conflitto, 8(2),417–442. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v8i2p417
Clatworthy, J., Hinds J., & Camic, P.M. (2013). Gardening as a mental health intervention: A review. Mental Health Review Journal 18(4), 214-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHRJ-02- 2013-0007
Chirinos, D. A., Ong, J. C., Garcini, L. M., Alvarado, D., & Fagundes, C. (2019). Bereavement, Self-Reported Sleep Disturbances, and Inflammation: Results From Project HEART. Psychosomatic Medicine, 81(1), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000645
Cohen, S. (1988) Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States In: Spacapam S and Oskamp S (eds) The Social Psychology of Health. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 31–67.
Crunk, A. E., Burke, L. A., Neimeyer, R. A., Robinson, E., III, & Bai, H. (2021). The Coping Assessment for Bereavement and Loss Experiences (CABLE): Development and Initial Validation. Death Studies, 45(9), 677–691. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2019.1676323
Dietz, L. (2012). Healing Spaces: Gardening Activities for Stress-Reduction. https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/ms_occ_therapy/38/
Howarth, M., Brettle, A., Hardman, M., & Maden, M. (2020). What is the evidence for the impact of gardens and gardening on health and well-being: a scoping review and evidence- based logic model to guide healthcare strategy decision making on the use of gardening approaches as a social prescription. BMJ Open, 10(7), e036923. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036923
Janke, M., Nimrod, G., & Kleiber, I. D. (2008). Leisure Activity and Depressive Symptoms of Widowed and Married Women in Later Life. Journal of Leisure Research,40(2), 250-266. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2008.11950140
Koay, W.I. & Dillion, D. (2020) Community gardening: stress, well-being and resilience potentials. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6740. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186740
Lachowycz, K., & Jones, A. P. (2011). Greenspace and obesity: a systematic review of the evidence. Obesity reviews: an Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 12(5), e183–e189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2010.00827.x
Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., de Vries, S., Spreeuwenberg, P., Schellevis, F. G., & Groenewegen, P. P. (2009). Morbidity is related to a green living environment. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 63(12), 967–973. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2008.079038
Machado, M. M., & Swank, J. M. (2019). Therapeutic gardening: A counseling approach for bereavement from suicide. Death Studies, 43(10), 629–633.https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2018.1509908
Mizuno-Matsumoto, Y., Kobashi, S., Hata, Y., Ishikawa, O., & Asano, F. (2008). Horticultural Therapy has Beneficial Effects on Brain Functions in Cerebrovascular Disease. International Journal of Intelligent Computing in Medical Sciences and Imaging Processing, 2, 169-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1931308X.2008.10644162
Pietrabissa, G. & Simpson, S.G. Psychological consequence of social isolation during COVID- 19 outbreak. Frontiers in Psychology, 11:2201. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02201
Prior, A., Fenger-Grøn, M., Davydow, D. S., Olsen, J., Li, J., Guldin, M. B., & Vestergaard, M. (2017). Bereavement, multimorbidity and mortality: a population-based study using bereavement as an indicator of mental stress. Psychological Medicine, 48(9), 1437–1443. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291717002380
Rahman, M. A., Hoque, N., Alif, S. M., Salehin, M., Islam, S. M. S., Banik, B., Sharif, A., Na zim, N. B., Sultana, F., & Cross, W. (2020). Factors associated with psychological distress, fear and coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. Globalization and Health, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-020-00624-w
Rodríguez-Rey, R., Garrido-Hernansaiz, H., & Collado, S. (2020). Psychological Impact and Associated Factors During the Initial Stage of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Among the General Population in Spain. Frontiers in Psychology, 1540. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01540
Sanchez, E. L., & Liamputtong, P. (2016). Community gardening and health-related benefits for a rural Victorian town. Leisure Studies, 36(2), 269–281. https://doi.org/10.108 0/02614367.2016.1250805
Snell, W. E., Jr., Johnson, G., Lloyd, P. J., & Hoover, W. (1991). The development and validation of the Health Orientation Scale: A measure of psychological tendencies Ass ociated with health. European Journal of Personality, 5, 169-183.https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2410050208
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., & Yamaura, Y. (2016). Gardening is beneficial for health: A meta- analysis. Preventive medicine reports, 5, 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.11.007
Theodorou, A., Panno, A., Carrus, G., Carbone, G. A., Massullo, C., & Imperatori, C. (2021). Stay home, stay safe, stay green: The role of gardening activities on mental health during the Covid-19 home confinement. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 61, 12 7091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127091
Thompson, R. (2018). Gardening for health: a regular dose of gardening. Clinical Medicine (London, England), 18(3), 201–205. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.18-3-201