Speaker
Description
Tranquillity is recognised as a key component of restorative environments. However, it remains insufficiently conceptualised as a fundamentally multisensory experience and one that spans from the ideal to the pragmatic. This study examines how tranquillity is constituted through interactions between sensory modalities and differs between an attributed ideal landscape and as experienced in the latest nature visit.Empirically, the study draws on a national survey from Denmark (n = 9,125), including georeferenced mappings of perceived tranquillity and open-text responses (n = 1,222). A qualitative coding analysis identified sensory dimensions and environmental features, complemented by spatial analyses of distribution across landscape types and urban–rural gradients.Results show that positive contributions to tranquillity are articulated as immersive experiences, often without explicit sensory reference. When specified, visual and auditory cues dominate e.g. natural landscapes, water, and natural sounds. In contrast, negative perceptions are more explicitly shaped by auditory disruptions, particularly human activity and traffic noise. Whilst the ideal relies on natural landscapes away from the urban core, the urban core holds much of the experienced tranquillity. This reveals a consistent asymmetry: while positive experiences rely on integrated sensory conditions, disruption is mainly associated with sound. Although tranquillity is associated with peripheral landscapes, people find pragmatic tranquillity in the urban ones.Conceptually, the study extends soundscape frameworks by integrating multisensory environmental perception of tranquillity. Methodologically, it demonstrates the potential of triangulating large-scale participatory mapping with qualitative and spatial analysis to capture environmental perception across contexts.