A move from the big city to a small village is always a culture shock, but can it affect just more than your Friday night plans?

Now, I've lived in rural and urban locales. But either the local water utilities people put happy pills in the water supply here, or my overstimulation cup had overfloweth'd, because this latest move seemed more a stark contrast.

While I loved my previous home, with its international flavor, amazing food, world-class culture and more, the constant stimulation of living and working in the city was getting to me. My new home is actually labeled as a borough, but is better described as a tiny village. Being from Minnesota, I prefer plain-speaking, honest folk who are low-key. But I do love the excitement and intellectual stimulation of the city. So which is it? And why do some people flourish in certain environments? And why do all dentist offices feature soothing nature landscapes on their walls?

Luckily for me, a researcher named Rachel Kaplan, as well as a number of other scientists, has been looking at the interrelationship between environment and psychological well-being.

The reasonable person

An interesting article from 2003, co-authored by Stephan Kaplan, discusses the framework Kaplan uses to explain why people feel better in certain environments - the Reasonable Person Model. "The Reasonable Person Model is a conceptual framework that links environmental factors with human behavior. People are more reasonable, cooperative, helpful, and satisfied when the environment supports their basic informational needs. The same environmental supports are important factors in enhancing human health," according to the article's abstract.

Crime, lack of community, and dependence on motorized transportation serve as pertinent examples of rampant urban ills, the authors state, which naturally affect public health and physical, social and mental well-being. But the RPM doesn't just address social patterns - and many stereotypically consider small towns as lacking culture and social life - it also takes into consideration the link between social behavior and external environment, and posits that people are more reasonable when their environment supports their basic informational needs.

People's core information needs are threefold: one, exploration and understanding - acquiring and understanding information. Two, meaningful action - acting effectively based on that information. Three, restoration - maintaining the capacity to focus on, select and respond appropriately to information in the environment. If one is out of balance - you are overstimulated, for example - your ability to do any of the three, especially restoration, is compromised.

It should come as no surprise that many of the most effective settings for recovering from directed-attention fatigue involve the natural environment. But recovering from other ills - stress, even cholecystectomy, also is boosted by the natural environment, and people can reap benefits such as cognitive performance and affective states.

Even something as simple as a few trees, more rugged terrain and the suggestion of a walking path (instead of the large open mowed spaces around parking lots) enhances employee satisfaction, and green space can improve feelings of safety and happiness in inner city communities.

So what does all of this mean? Public health researchers have long known that community planning can have a direct impact on the health of its citizens. The authors say their model can help researchers  identify needed changes by addressing both environmental factors and broad health issues in the context of human informational needs. Such changes, they posit, involve making the environment more understandable, creating interesting but reassuring opportunities for exploration, providing settings that offer restorative experiences, and incorporating processes that include people in decision-making.