When Places Remember: How Environment and Culture Shape the Trauma Experience

Trauma affects individuals of all genders and ages, frequently disrupting one’s sense of wholeness and leaving them struggling to reconnect with their former selves.

The world can feel unpredictable for people who have experienced trauma. A sound, scent, or tone of voice can stir sudden feelings of fear, anger, or shame. These moments, often called triggers, arise through the brain’s predictive networks, which interpret incoming sensory information based on past experience (Friston, 2010). Triggers are not solely psychological; they are lived, embodied reactions shaped by ecological and cultural surroundings. Light, sound, texture, spatial layout, and social behavior all influence how the brain assigns meaning to a situation.

When environmental stimuli resemble those of a past traumatic event, the amygdala rapidly signals the body to prepare for defense. Stress hormones such as cortisol and adrenaline heighten alertness but interfere with the hippocampus, which normally organizes experiences into coherent, time-bound memories.

Consequently, traumatic memories may be stored as fragmented sensory or emotional impressions rather than integrated narratives. At the same time, the prefrontal cortex becomes less active, limiting the brain’s ability to regulate emotion or contextualize a threat. The overactive amygdala disrupts the hippocampus and the under-engaged prefrontal cortex, which allows trauma to remain embedded in the nervous system. Later triggers can evoke physiological and emotional responses as if the original threat were occurring again.

Triggers do not emerge in isolation. They are shaped by geography, climate, culture, and social context, each of which influences how safety and stress are perceived. Trauma is both biological and environmental; the setting in which a person lives or receives care can either intensify stress responses or help calm the nervous system. Sensory conditions, community behaviors, and cultural expectations all affect how quickly the brain detects a threat and how effectively it returns to baseline. Healing, therefore, is grounded not only in internal processes but also in the environments people inhabit and the relationships they form with the elements in those environments.

Geography and the Built Environment

The physical environment plays a central role in how triggers are experienced and managed. Auditory and visual overstimulation increases sympathetic nervous system arousal, potentially reactivating traumatic memories (Ulrich et al., 1991; Kopec, 2024). In contrast, nature, daylight, and open views support parasympathetic regulation and help restore physiological balance (Berto, 2014; Porges, 2011).

Rhythmic cues in natural settings, such as moving water or shifting light patterns, often align with the body’s internal rhythms. Yet natural environments are not universally soothing. For individuals whose trauma involved animals or wilderness, these settings may act as triggers (Mineka & Zinbarg, 2006). Prospect–Refuge Theory further suggests that people feel most at ease when they can observe their surroundings from a protected position.

Prospect-Refuge Theory states that we feel safe when we can survey our surroundings with ease while having a secure, sheltered position that supports a sense of control.

Geographical isolation, poor wayfinding, and unpredictable spatial conditions can heighten vulnerability and reinforce hypervigilance. Key principles in trauma-informed design include the ability of the environment to offer clarity, choice, and predictability, and to support emotional regulation and a sense of control (Harris & Fallot, 2001; Kopec, 2022).

Climate also influences trauma responses. Because traumatic memories are often stored as sensory fragments, temperature extremes, darkness, or severe weather can reactivate stress pathways. Extreme heat is associated with heightened irritability, aggression, and elevated cortisol, which can intensify emotional dysregulation (Anderson et al., 2020). Prolonged darkness and cold weather are linked to depressive symptoms and reduced resilience (Rosenthal et al., 1984). Environmental cues such as the smell of smoke, thunder, or heavy rain may similarly trigger memories of earlier trauma (Yehuda & LeDoux, 2007).

Design can mitigate these responses. Built environments that offer thermal control, balanced lighting, ventilation, and protection from harsh weather reduce physiological strain. Hot regions benefit from shading, reflective materials, and cooling zones, while northern climates benefit from daylighting strategies, brighter finishes, and indoor greenery.

Providing users with some agency over their surroundings further enhances perceived control and supports nervous system regulation. Environmental affordances allow individuals to adjust stimulation and maintain a stable internal state, thereby strengthening trauma resilience.

Geography and climate establish the backdrop for how triggers are experienced, while design shapes how people interpret and cope with those conditions. Trauma-informed design recognizes that environments influence emotional regulation, memory, and perceptions of safety. By addressing local environmental stressors, designers help modulate physiological responses to triggers and create spaces aligned with the nervous system’s need for predictability and security.

Regional and Sociocultural Factors

Geography and climate shape culture and social norms, which in turn influence how trauma is understood and expressed. While trauma’s neurobiological mechanisms are universal, cultural contexts determine what is considered traumatic and how distress is communicated or suppressed (Kirmayer et al., 2011). Trauma’s biological impact does not differ between men and women. What differs is the social framework that determines whose suffering is acknowledged and how expression is interpreted.

Collectivist societies often provide protective structures through community networks and shared rituals. Storytelling, dance, and ceremony strengthen social bonds and engage oxytocin-related systems that counteract hyperarousal (Cozolino, 2014). In cultures that stigmatize emotional disclosure or idealize stoicism, distress may be internalized, reinforcing fear circuits and contributing to chronic hyperarousal or dissociation (van der Kolk, 2014). Societies that equate trauma with moral weakness intensify shame and limit opportunities for processing.

Conditions such as poverty, conflict, or discrimination can further intensify trauma responses. Repeated exposure to sirens, gunfire, or threatening authority figures may keep the body in an extended state of alert, disrupting the HPA axis (hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal) and contributing to anxiety and fatigue (McEwen, 2007). Yet these same regions often demonstrate strong collective resilience. Shared narratives, spiritual traditions, and remembrance practices strengthen a sense of belonging and reduce physiological stress (Ungar, 2013).

Trauma-informed design must therefore be culturally grounded. Spatial arrangements, colors, symbols, materials, and privacy expectations vary widely across cultures. Open-plan spaces may feel liberating to some but unsafe to others. Effective design acknowledges local knowledge systems and community histories, creating environments that validate diverse expressions of distress and healing.

Biases in The Research

Emerging cross-cultural research indicates that trauma affects individuals equally, though its expression varies across genders and societies. The commonly cited claim that women are more likely to develop PTSD reflects methodological and cultural bias rather than inherent vulnerability. Many studies supporting this claim are based on Western populations, where men are discouraged from acknowledging emotional distress or seeking psychological care (Tolin & Foa, 2006). Consequently, behaviors such as risk-taking, aggression, or self-medication, which are common coping strategies among men, are often misclassified as behavioral or moral issues rather than trauma-related symptoms.

Research from Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa demonstrates that when trauma type, social role, and culturally specific expressions are taken into account, gender differences in PTSD often disappear or even reverse (Karam et al., 2014; Scholte et al., 2004). Western diagnostic frameworks have historically emphasized internalizing symptoms such as fear, avoidance, and hypervigilance, which are more socially acceptable for women, while overlooking externalizing responses that are more common among men. This bias reinforces the false perception that women are inherently more psychologically vulnerable. In reality, trauma’s neurobiological impact operates through universal mechanisms of stress, memory, and neuroendocrine regulation. What differs is the cultural lens through which suffering is interpreted, validated, or dismissed.

Conclusion

Trauma and its triggers affect individuals equally at the neurobiological level, but sociocultural norms, geography, and climate shape how trauma is expressed, perceived, and managed. Trauma-informed design must therefore accommodate diverse responses, from internalizing to externalizing, and from visible to covert. Restorative elements should be tailored to regional and cultural contexts. Spatial clarity, predictability, and environmental control reduce hypervigilance, while culturally grounded design strategies need to promote a sense of belonging and emotional regulation.

Ultimately, trauma-related triggers arise from an ongoing interaction between body, environment, and culture. The geography of safety is learned and can be relearned through intentional design, supportive climates, and inclusive communities. Identifying probable triggers requires careful observation, experience, and reasoning so that solutions promote recovery without compromising design integrity.

Additional Readings

Anderson, C. A., Bushman, B. J., & Groom, R. W. (2020). Hot temperatures and human aggression: A comprehensive review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(6), 1132–1156.

Berto, R. (2014). The role of nature in coping with psycho-physiological stress: A literature review on restorativeness. Behavioral Sciences, 4(4), 394–409.

Bratman, G. N., Anderson, C. B., Berman, M. G., Cochran, B., de Vries, S., Flanders, J., … Gross, J. J. (2019). Nature and mental health: An ecosystem service perspective. Science Advances, 5(7), eaax0903.

Cozolino, L. (2014). The neuroscience of human relationships: Attachment and the developing social brain (2nd ed.). W. W. Norton.

Friston, K. (2010). The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 127–138.

Harris, M., & Fallot, R. D. (2001). Using trauma theory to design service systems. Jossey-Bass.

Karam, E. G., Friedman, M. J., Hill, E. D., Kessler, R. C., McLaughlin, K. A., Petukhova, M., … Koenen, K. C. (2014). Cumulative traumas and risk thresholds: 12-month PTSD in the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. Depression and Anxiety, 31(2), 130–142.

Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182.

Kirmayer, L. J., Gone, J. P., & Moses, J. (2011). Rethinking historical trauma. Transcultural Psychiatry, 51(3), 299–319.

Kopec, D. (2022). Environmental psychology for design (3rd ed.). Fairchild Books.

Kopec, D. (2024). Design for health and wellness environments. Routledge.

McEwen, B. S. (2007). Physiology and neurobiology of stress and adaptation. Physiological Reviews, 87(3), 873–904.

Mineka, S., & Zinbarg, R. (2006). A contemporary learning theory perspective on the etiology of anxiety disorders. American Psychologist, 61(1), 10–26.

Porges, S. W. (2011). The polyvagal theory: Neurophysiological foundations of emotions, attachment, communication, and self-regulation. W. W. Norton.

Rosenthal, N. E., Sack, D. A., Gillin, J. C., Lewy, A. J., Goodwin, F. K., Davenport, Y., … Wehr, T. A. (1984). Seasonal affective disorder: A description of the syndrome and preliminary findings with light therapy. Archives of General Psychiatry, 41(1), 72–80.

Scholte, W. F., Olff, M., Ventevogel, P., de Vries, G. J., Jansveld, E., Cardozo, B. L., & Crawford, C. A. (2004). Mental health symptoms following war and repression in eastern Afghanistan. JAMA, 292(5), 585–593.

Tolin, D. F., & Foa, E. B. (2006). Sex differences in trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder: A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 132(6), 959–992.

Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201–230.

Ungar, M. (2013). Resilience, trauma, context, and culture. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 14(3), 255–266.

van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Viking.

Yehuda, R., & LeDoux, J. (2007). Response variation following trauma: A translational neuroscience approach to understanding PTSD. Neuron, 56(1), 19–32.