Beyond exposure: Toward more precise terminology in nature and health research

Imprecise language can weaken understanding of human–nature relationships. Widespread use of the term “exposure” to describe nature’s health impacts treats diverse experiences as uniform “doses” like chemical compounds. Through a narrative review of how “exposure” emerged and spread in nature–health research, we show that the term is relatively recent and has proliferated despite key limitations. “Exposure” accurately applies only in contexts where nature provides quantifiable doses (e.g., airborne microbes, biogenic compounds) that are consumed with relatively consistent effects. We identify three major problems with broader use of the term: benefits depending on attention or moderated by perception; benefits arising from behavioral affordances; and human–nature relationships being reciprocal. To improve precision, we offer a framework of ten measurement constructs, each with clear definitions, measurement approaches, and appropriate usage contexts. This shift in language will support both human wellbeing and planetary health by acknowledging our interdependence with nature.