Roe expands restoration from a short-term reaction into a wider ecology of affect, mental health, self-regulation and person–environment fit. The thesis distinguishes discrete restoration from longer-term “instoration” and examines environments as niches capable of supporting mood regulation, trust, reflection, personal goals and social cohesion. Its methodological breadth is particularly important: quantitative measures, interviews, participant observation, personal-project analysis and visual elicitation are combined across natural, built-external and built-internal settings. This plural method destabilises a simple nature-good/city-bad binary. Built environments can also become restorative for particular groups, while people with different mental-health conditions respond differently to the same spatial categories. The theoretical operation is therefore relational rather than categorical: restorative capacity emerges through the conjunction of setting, person, social context, activity and need. For architecture and urban research, Roe provides an unusually fertile bridge between affective environmental psychology and situated spatial analysis, suggesting that wellbeing depends less on generic environmental labels than on the fit between spatial affordances and changing psychological conditions.