Watch people in a botanic garden for an afternoon and a pattern emerges. Most of them walk. They move along the path at a steady pace, glance at a bed or a tree, and keep going. A few stop — crouch to read a label, photograph a flower, sit on a bench and stay a while. Almost everything we hope a visit will do — restore, teach, satisfy, bring someone back — lands disproportionately on that second group. The design question that follows is simple to ask and surprisingly hard to answer: how do you turn more of the walkers into dwellers?
Most visitors are just passing through
The honest starting point is that attention, by default, is brief. Studies of how visitors use signage put the average glance at an information sign in the low seconds. In the literature reviewed by Spooner and colleagues, a non-interactive sign holds the eye for roughly a single second, while an interactive one manages closer to twelve, and total sign-viewing across a whole exhibit area averages only a little over a minute.¹ By some estimates, only a tenth to a third of visitors read a given sign at all.¹
The visitor is not being difficult; they are doing what people do in any rich environment — sampling, not studying. Left to itself, a green space is something most people move through, not something they settle into. If we want them to stay, the question is not how to make them read more, but what could make them slow down at all.
What makes people slow down
One of the most durable answers comes from environmental psychology. In his account of Attention Restoration Theory, Stephen Kaplan argued that directed attention — the effortful, focused kind we spend all day at work and on screens — is a limited resource that fatigues, and that natural settings are unusually good at replenishing it.² They do so through what he called soft fascination: the effortless, involuntary attention drawn by moving water, dappled light, rustling foliage, birdsong — stimuli interesting enough to hold us, yet undemanding enough to let the mind rest.² A restorative setting, in his framework, also offers a sense of being away from daily demands and enough richness to feel worth exploring.²
This matters for dwell time because soft fascination is, almost by definition, the experience of slowing down. A visitor held by something effortlessly interesting is a visitor who has stopped walking. The green space that invites dwelling is not the one with the most to read; it is the one with the most to be quietly fascinated by.
A visitor held by something effortlessly interesting is a visitor who has stopped walking.
Why dwelling matters: satisfaction and return
It would be easy to treat lingering as a nice-to-have. The visitor-experience research suggests it is closer to the heart of the matter. Studying 373 visitors to a botanic garden in Gran Canaria, Díaz-Meneses and Amador-Marrero found that both satisfaction and loyalty rested on emotion and the senses — and, strikingly, that neither was rooted in the information the garden provided.³ Loyalty in particular, the wish to return, was shaped by the "high-involvement" senses of smell and touch.³ A garden does not earn a second visit by explaining more; it earns one by making people feel, and smell, and touch something.
The thread from experience to return appears again in tourism research. Examining the quality of gardens tourism, Shapoval, Rivera and Croes found that the experience itself drives satisfaction and the intention to come back — and that first-time and repeat visitors weigh that experience differently, so a place must work on both at once.⁴ Dwelling — the slow, sensory, absorbed kind of visit — is precisely where experience quality is built. A visitor who only passes through has, almost by definition, not had much of an experience to be satisfied with.
Designing for dwelling
None of this argues for more signage. It argues for more reasons to stop. Three moves follow from the evidence.
First, lead with the senses, not the text. Since satisfaction and loyalty are built on emotion and the senses rather than on information,³ the features worth investing in are the ones that engage a body standing still: scent, texture, sound, a framed view, a place to sit. A fragrant border does more for a return visit than a longer label ever will.
Second, reward the stop. The same research that finds attention brief also finds that interactive elements hold it many times longer than static ones.¹ A feature that responds — that offers a choice, a question, a layer that does something — can turn a one-second glance into a minute of engagement. This is where a layered label earns its place: not as more text to read while walking, but as an invitation to pause and go deeper for those who want to, leaving the surface short for everyone else.
Third, give people a reason to return. Because repeat visitors experience a place differently from first-timers,⁴ a green space that changes — by season, by event, by what is in flower this week — turns a single visit into a habit. Dwelling is not only minutes on one afternoon; it is also the decision to come back for another.
Interpretation that holds
There is an old idea underneath all of this. More than sixty years ago, Freeman Tilden, who shaped the modern practice of interpretation in parks and museums, argued that the aim of interpretation is not to instruct but to provoke — to relate what is in front of the visitor to something already within them, and so to spark the curiosity that makes a person want to look longer.⁵ A fact, simply delivered, is quickly walked past. A question, well provoked, makes someone stop. Designing for dwell time is, in the end, Tilden's old goal measured in minutes: give the visitor a reason to stay a little longer than they meant to.
The takeaway
Most visitors will always walk, and that is fine — a green space should be a pleasure to move through. But the visit that restores, satisfies and brings someone back is the one where they slowed down, and that is something a garden can be designed to invite. Engage the senses, reward the pause, and change with the seasons. Turn even a fraction of the walkers into dwellers and you have not merely lengthened a visit; you have deepened it.
Sources
- 1. Spooner SL, Heath N, Dymond T. Using eye-tracking to create impactful interpretation signage for botanic gardens and other visitor attractions. Journal of Zoological and Botanical Gardens. 2024;5(3):434–454. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5636/5/3/29
- 2. Kaplan S. The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 1995;15(3):169–182. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0272494495900012
- 3. Díaz-Meneses G, Amador-Marrero M. Visitor experience at Viera y Clavijo botanic garden: satisfaction and loyalty antecedents. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism. 2024;47:100778. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221307802400046X
- 4. Shapoval V, Rivera M, Croes R. The quality of gardens tourism and the visitor experience: differentiating between first time and repeat visitors. Annals of Leisure Research. 2021;24(4):449–467. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/11745398.2020.1744174
- 5. Tilden F. Interpreting our heritage. Chapel Hill (NC): University of North Carolina Press; 1957. [book] Available from: https://uncpress.org/book/9780807858677/interpreting-our-heritage/