Cultural and historical sites nested within natural environments are an important part of an area's identity and heritage. However, presenting information in open, outdoor spaces can be challenging, often making it dificult for visitors to have an engaging and meaningful experience. Technology has the potential to convey the cultural value and raise awareness about the environmental changes that have occurred. Nevertheless, there remains a notable gap in how to achieve this using unobtrusive, seamless technological interfaces. This work aims to address this gap by designing tangible artefacts to induce empathy with nature.
The natural world has always been very influential on the culture of an area. Rivers and mountains have shaped the borders between countries, while raw materials like papyrus enabled writing, and others like marble had a big efect on architecture. From a historical perspective, some natural landscapes are connected with important figures, incidents, and rituals and have been the protagonists in numerous myths, folk stories, and songs.
However, navigating cultural sites nested within nature can become uninteresting for young visitors
without prior knowledge of the place or immigrants with diferent backgrounds. Agreeably, the display
of information becomes more dificult in open spaces. Attempts of making navigation more impactful
include mobile applications [
It is interesting to notice that natural landscapes are alive and, thus, they change unavoidably over
time, which would make the experience of being in one very diferent in the past or the future. Changes
that can be observed through the human senses include sounds, temperature, humidity, and biodiversity.
The reason behind this is climate change. Human land use and activity resulted in an important loss
of biodiversity, as underlined by Newbold et al. [
The goal of this research is to make the navigation in a cultural site more memorable by inducing empathy in people towards natural elements. The motivation behind it is to raise awareness about climate change and provide historical information. The target population includes people above the
CEUR Workshop
ISSN1613-0073 age of 15, potentially immigrants. In so doing, this research project aims at supporting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set by the United Nations1, namely, SDG 11 for cultural heritage, and 15 on awareness raising on climate change.
The main expected research contributions of the project are artefacts and advances in knowledge
concerning their design. The research methodology followed is Research through Design (RtD), in
which designed activities along with designed artefacts are the chief elements in the process of generating
and communicating knowledge [
There is a variety of terms in HCI concerning people’s interactions with nature. Examples are connection to nature, nature engagement , empathy with nature. These concepts share common concerns, thus it is important to consider similarities and diferences between them. In this section, an overview of the two most used terms is provided, nature engagement, and empathy with nature.
There are many reasons why HCI is concerned with nature engagement. Some of them are learning
about nature, protecting it, and exploring views on coexistence with nature from other cultures [
Empathy is a term widely used in the social sciences. A common ground across definitions is the notion of understanding and sharing another person’s experiences [10]. For the scope of this project, we are using the definition of empathy proposed by Cuf et al., which is the following:
Empathy is an emotional response (afective), dependent upon the interaction between trait capacities and state influences. Empathic processes are automatically elicited but are also shaped by top-down control processes. The resulting emotion is similar to one’s perception (directly experienced or imagined) and understanding (cognitive empathy) of the stimulus emotion, with recognition that the source of the emotion is not one’s own.
As stated above, the term empathy is restricted to its afective component, else “the experience of emotion”, and the cognitive part of empathy, else “the ability to understand another person’s feelings”, is represented by the term empathic understanding. Factors contributing to empathy are both permanent inclinations and state influences. In the context of empathy with nature, Tam defines these factors as dispositional and induced empathy with nature, respectively [11]. Induced empathy, Tam continues, is the result of a stimulation.
Tam mentions that, in environmental psychology, some thinkers have described empathy with nature as “the understanding and sharing of the emotional experience, particularly distress, of the natural world” [11]. According to Weber, empathy with nature is the same as environmental empathy [12].
It is important to disambiguate which natural entities empathy with nature is concerned with. Examples mentioned by Tam include mainly animate nature, except for one example that mentions wind as the empathy-triggering entity. Other researchers in this field have given some attention to empathy with animals and trees. For example, Berenguer has conducted research evaluating empathy with birds and trees [13], and Li et al. have studied empathy with animals [14]. Other researchers consider empathy with nature to go beyond experiencing the emotions of other beings, complying with Hall and Schwarz’s definition of empathy [ 15]. Musitu Ferrer is an example of this, who considers ‘damage in the environment’ a part of empathy with nature [16].
Therefore, in the field of empathy with nature, the focus is on the following natural elements: animals, plants and trees, processes and natural disaster phenomena. It remains unclear whether Tam’s conception of empathy with nature extends to non-animated parts of the natural world, e.g. soil, stones, etc. The definition he proposes focuses on the emotional connection with nature as a whole, yet it does not explicitly address entities that cannot themselves experience emotion.
After examining both nature engagement and empathy with nature, it appears that they are distinct and overlapping concepts. Nature engagement refers to interaction and experience and has been used with diferent meanings, among which are learning, sensing, and connecting. The term empathy with nature is used when there is arousal of feelings and potentially perspective taking of another entity. In the scoping review of HCI Research on “Engaging with Nature through Technology” by Webber et al., there is a small body of work relevant to empathy with nature, although it is not presented with this terminology. This work is mainly found in the categories “Experiencing nature from other perspectives” and “Natureculture”. Empathy with nature has been linked with increased environmental concern and conservation behaviour, according to Tam. Thus, this concept is considered more relevant for this work.
In this section, a preliminary literature review is presented for each research question presented above.
The strategies of inducing empathy difer based on the natural elements. Examples follow. 3.1.1. Perspective taking One strategy of inducing empathy with nature, mentioned by Tam, is perspective taking of nature in distress. This is achieved by showing life from the perspective of the animal, which is facing a dificulty. Most popular means of showing include storytelling, pictures [13], and videos [17]. Ιn this example by Li et al., empathy was induced in preschool children by reading a story [14]. According to the story, animals were living happily in the forest until people arrived, cut down all the trees and left them homeless. After the reading, researchers discussed with the children and guided them to identify the emotions of the animals (empathic understanding) and describe their own feelings. In this story, animals were also portrayed as having human concerns or habits, such as going out with their friends, revealing a second strategy for inducing empathy, which is attributing human-like characteristics. 3.1.2. Attributing Human-like Characteristics This strategy refers to either adding human features that don’t exist in the specific natural element or emphasising the already existing similarities. When it comes to animate nature, an example of emphasising the similarities with humans is the work by Stepanova et al., which featured synchronising people’s breathing with an animal, in this case, a jellyfish [ 18].
Inanimate nature shares fewer similarities with humans, so a potential strategy for generating empathy with it is adding human features. It has been seen that as human likeness in an object increases, people tend to feel a stronger sense of afinity towards it. However, Mori noticed that once this likeness reaches a certain threshold, empathy is replaced by a feeling of unease or even repulsion, a phenomenon he named “the uncanny valley” [19]. 3.1.3. Projection Since objects lack mental attributes, one approach of empathising relies on projection, as mentioned by Safdari Sharabiani [20]. In this case, a person empathises by imagining themselves in the position of the object, and thus assigning emotions to it through personal experience. Projection could also apply to animate nature. For example, upon seeing a tree destroyed from harsh weather conditions, with branches that lean towards the ground, a person might think: “If I were this tree, I would be very tired.’’. In this case, tiredness is the mental state projected in the tree.
A potential approach of this project is first-person storytelling narration coming from a natural element in the chosen cultural site, with emphasis on human features.
Diferent technologies have been used for inducing empathy, classified in virtual reality and unobtrusive. 3.2.1. Virtual Reality Manney explores how technology could afect people’s empathic capabilities [ 21]. Manney mentions that there are some technological projects, for example, virtual reality games, that have been seen to enhance the storytelling experience, which is, he continues, the most efective medium of cultivating empathy. An example of virtual reality being used to induce empathy with nature is provided by Stepanova et al. [18], with the strategy of breathing synchronisation. In this project, two players enter a virtual environment where they observe two jellyfish and a coral. They soon realise that each jellyfish is synchronised with their breathing. When both players align their breathing, the coral begins to grow. 3.2.2. Unobtrusive technology When it comes to motivating a connection with nature, especially for children, the potential of unobtrusive pervasive technology is highlighted by many researchers. This is defined as “technology without main attention” [22]. It is preferred in nature interaction as it does not distract people’s attention from nature. For instance, Caiola et al. created an unobstrusive tangible game for children [23]. In the sensory quiz they conducted, the sense of sound, followed by the sense of touch, and then smell, was found to be the most stimulating for children, enabling them to recollect memories. Two major design guidelines came up from this research. Firstly, technology should enable a more “engaging, still respectful way of interaction”, e.g., children cannot break branches but artefacts simulating them.
The second guideline is that technology must minimise stimulation. The focus of the children should not be on how the technological object works and its capabilities, but rather on the natural elements, e.g., screens are to be avoided as they are distracting. For similar reasons, the focus of this PhD project is also on unobtrusive tangibles, specifically designed for a chosen cultural site. The design process and materials will be informed of future contextual investigations.
According to Newman et al., diferent validation tools have been developed for empathy starting from the 1940s [24]. These tools target diferent components of empathy: afective, cognitive or both. Newman et al. provide a review of empathy assessment measures developed after 1991, dividing them into 3 categories: self-report instruments, behavioural observational methods, and neuroscientific approaches. Self-report instruments include questionnaires in a paper form. Behavioural observational methods include responses to a stimulation, as an image, or performance in a test. Neuroscientific approaches include brain imaging techniques (such as fMRI), methods for assessing central nervous system activity (like EEG), facial electromyography (EMG), and measures of autonomic nervous system activity (including skin conductance and heart rate). All methods have certain advantages and disadvantages. The authors conclude that the plethora of empathy measurement tools available could be interpreted as a need for context and population-specific evaluation of empathy in research. One of the measures not included in this review is the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) developed by Davis in 1983 [25]. IRI was used in measuring dispositional empathy with nature by Tam.
Inducing empathy with nature in visitors of a cultural site has the potential to make the navigation more impactful, while at the same time creating awareness about climate change and the historical events that occurred there. Technology and, more particularly, tangible interfaces are an important tool towards this direction, due to their potential to stimulate the senses. However, they have been less explored. The next steps of this research are a review of the work conducted on navigation in natural sites and museums with unobtrusive technologies and prototyping.
During the preparation of this work, the author used Grammarly for grammar and syntax correction. Further, the author used Wordtune and ChatGPT-4o mini in order to paraphrase and reword. After using these tools/services, the author reviewed and edited the content as needed and takes full responsibility for the publication’s content. [8] M. Boekaerts, Engagement as an inherent aspect of the learning process, Learning and instruction 43 (2016) 76–83. [9] J. A. Fredricks, P. C. Blumenfeld, A. H. Paris, School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence, Review of Educational Research 74 (2004) 59–109. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059, publisher: American Educational Research Association. [10] B. M. Cuf, S. J. Brown, L. Taylor, D. J. Howat, Empathy: A Review of the Concept, Emotion
Review 8 (2016) 144–153. doi:10.1177/1754073914558466, publisher: SAGE Publications. [11] K.-P. Tam, Dispositional empathy with nature, Journal of Environmental Psychology 35 (2013) 92–104. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.05.004. [12] R. Weber, Somatics: Practices toward developing environmental empathy, AVANT. Pismo
Awangardy Filozoficzno-Naukowej (2021) 1–21. [13] J. Berenguer, The efect of empathy in proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors, Environment and behavior 39 (2007) 269–283. [14] Y. Li, Y. Zhao, Q. Huang, J. Deng, X. Deng, J. Li, Empathy with nature promotes pro-environmental attitudes in preschool children, PsyCh Journal 13 (2024) 598–607. doi:10.1002/pchj.735, _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pchj.735. [15] J. A. Hall, , R. Schwartz, Empathy present and future, The Journal of Social Psychology 159 (2019) 225–243. doi:10.1080/00224545.2018.1477442. [16] D. Musitu-Ferrer, M. Esteban-Ibañez, C. León-Moreno, O. F. García, Is School Adjustment Related to Environmental Empathy and Connectedness to Nature?, Psychosocial Intervention 28 (2019) 101–110. doi:10.5093/pi2019a8, company: Colegio Oficial de la Psicologia de Madrid (copmadrid) Distributor: Colegio Oficial de la Psicologia de Madrid (copmadrid) Institution: Colegio Oficial de la Psicologia de Madrid (copmadrid) Label: Colegio Oficial de la Psicologia de Madrid (copmadrid) Publisher: Colegio Oficial de la Psicologia de Madrid Section: research-article. [17] M. L. Shelton, R. W. Rogers, Fear-arousing and empathy-arousing appeals to help: The pathos of persuasion, Journal of applied social psychology 11 (1981) 366–378. [18] E. R. Stepanova, J. Desnoyers-Stewart, P. Pasquier, B. E. Riecke, Jel: Breathing together to connect with others and nature, in: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 2020, pp. 641–654. [19] M. Mori, K. F. MacDorman, N. Kageki, The uncanny valley [from the field], IEEE Robotics & automation magazine 19 (2012) 98–100. [20] A. Safdari Sharabiani, Genuine empathy with inanimate objects, Phenomenology and the Cognitive
Sciences 20 (2021) 831–846. [21] P. J. Manney, Empathy in the time of technology: How storytelling is the key to empathy., Journal of Evolution & Technology 19 (2008). [22] T. C. Kwok, P. Kiefer, M. Raubal, Unobtrusive interaction: a systematic literature review and expert survey, Human–Computer Interaction 39 (2024) 380–416. [23] V. Caiola, E. Cusumano, M. Motta, L. Piro, M. Gelsomini, D. Morra, M. Rizvi, M. Matera, Designing integrated physical–digital systems for children–nature interaction, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 36 (2023) 100582. [24] D. L. Neumann, R. C. Chan, G. J. Boyle, Y. Wang, H. R. Westbury, Measures of empathy: Self-report, behavioral, and neuroscientific approaches, Measures of personality and social psychological constructs (2015) 257–289. [25] M. H. Davis, Measuring individual diferences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44 (1983) 113–126. doi:10.1037/0022- 3514. 44.1.113, place: US Publisher: American Psychological Association.