In the present era, when urban life is fraught with numerous stressors, the quality of educational environments has become a vital issue. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of biophilic design components on stress reduction in university public spaces. The study was conducted as a case study at Jahad Daneshgahi Kermanshah using a quantitative survey method. The statistical population included 75 undergraduate and graduate architecture students who were selected through convenience sampling. The research tool was a researcher-made questionnaire consisting of 15 items in three functional-social, physical-environmental, and experiential-perceptual factors with acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.89). The findings showed that there is an inverse, strong, and significant relationship between the total biophilic score and the stress level of users (r = -0.745). The strongest relationship was related to the physical-environmental factor (-0.701). Also, the assessment of the current state of the space indicated strengths (such as vegetation with a mean of 4.23) and critical weaknesses (such as multi-sensory stimulation with a mean of 2.70 and activity diversity with a mean of 2.78). As a result, redesigning university public spaces based on biophilic principles is not only an aesthetic ideal, but also an effective intervention with statistical support for promoting mental health and educational productivity. This study confirms the role of biophilicity as an essential strategy for creating resilient and health-oriented university environments.

This study, titled "Analyzing the Impact of Biophilic Design in Public Spaces on Stress Reduction," aimed to investigate the influence of biophilic design components on the perceived stress levels of users within a university public space, employing a case study methodology at the Jihad-e Daneshgahi (ACECR) of Kermanshah. The biophilic design approach, rooted in the concept of "biophilia" or humanity's innate affinity for nature, seeks to reintegrate natural elements, patterns, and processes into the built environment. It posits that fostering a tangible connection with nature—whether through direct incorporation (like plants, water, and natural light), indirect or symbolic representation (using natural materials, forms, and geometries), or through the spatial experience itself (prospect and refuge, mystery)—can have profound restorative effects on human psychology and physiology.

To empirically examine this proposition within a specific local context, the research adopted a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) strategy. The target population consisted of 75 undergraduate and graduate architecture students from the center, selected through convenience sampling. The primary instrument for data collection was a researcher-developed questionnaire designed with a strong foundation in established biophilic design frameworks, such as those proposed by Kellert and Browning et al. This instrument comprised 15 items systematically categorized into three core factors: Functional-Social (addressing aspects like spatial choice between solitude and community, comfort, and activity diversity), Physical-Environmental (focusing on tangible natural elements like daylight, vegetation, natural views, materials, and dynamic elements like water), and Experiential-Perceptual (pertaining to the psychological experience, including feelings of relaxation, sensory stimulation, curiosity, and a balance between prospect and refuge). The questionnaire demonstrated high internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.89, confirming its reliability for measurement.

The quantitative findings provided robust statistical support for the central hypothesis. A Spearman's correlation analysis (chosen due to non-normal data distribution confirmed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests) revealed a strong, inverse, and statistically significant relationship (p < 0.01) between the overall biophilic quality score and users' self-reported stress levels, with a correlation coefficient of -0.745. This indicates that as the perceived presence of biophilic attributes increases, perceived stress decreases substantially. Among the three factors, the Physical-Environmental dimension showed the strongest individual correlation with stress reduction (r = -0.701), followed by the Functional-Social (r = -0.643) and Experiential-Perceptual (r = -0.589) factors. This hierarchy suggests that the direct, tangible presence of nature within the space—such as ample vegetation, access to natural light, and views of greenery—may be the most potent contributor to alleviating stress in this setting.

A detailed descriptive analysis of the current space, however, painted a nuanced picture of strengths and critical weaknesses. Users highly rated specific Physical-Environmental elements, such as "presence of live and diverse vegetation" (mean = 4.23) and "presence of dynamic natural elements" (mean = 3.99), indicating successful integration in these areas. Functionally, "creating a sense of security" and "availability of comfortable seating" also received favorable scores. Conversely, the space performed poorly on two fronts: "diversity of possible activities" (mean = 2.78) and "multi-sensory stimulation" (mean = 2.70), with over 56% of respondents rating the latter as "low" or "very low." This highlights a significant gap; while the space incorporates some visually natural elements, it fails to provide a rich, multi-functional, and sensorily engaging experience that fully leverages biophilic principles.

In conclusion, this study confirms that integrating biophilic design into public university spaces is not a mere aesthetic luxury but a statistically valid intervention for promoting mental health and reducing environmental stress. The findings move beyond a general affirmation to offer a prioritized roadmap for designers and facility managers. The strong correlation of the Physical-Environmental factor underscores the high impact of interventions like enhancing daylight penetration, introducing water features, and expanding plant diversity. Simultaneously, addressing the identified critical weaknesses—particularly the poverty of activity choices and sensory engagement—is paramount. This can be achieved by creating flexible, multi-purpose zones that support both individual study and social interaction, incorporating auditory elements (like nature sounds), tactile natural materials, and designs that evoke curiosity and exploration. Therefore, this research advocates for a transformative approach, reimagining university public spaces not as mere transitional or utilitarian areas but as intentional "restorative environments" that actively contribute to the cognitive resilience, social well-being, and overall productivity of the academic community.