Closing the Gap: How Desire Affects Perceptions of Distance

When we judge distance, desired objects seem nearer

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


We often assume we see our physical surroundings as they actually are. But new research suggests that how we see the world depends on what we want from it.

People see desirable objects as physically closer than less desirable ones, according to a study in the January issue of Psychological Science. When psychologists Emily Balcetis of New
York University and David Dunning of Cornell University asked people to estimate how far away a bottle of water was, those who were thirsty guessed it was closer than nonthirsty people did. This difference in perception showed up in a physical challenge, too. People tossing a beanbag at a $25 gift card were, on average, nine inches shy, whereas people aiming for a gift card worth nothing overshot by an inch.

As the brain evolved, people who saw distances to goals as shorter might have gone after what they wanted more often. This error in perception was actually an advantage, leading people to get what they needed—and, perhaps, survive more often than their more accurate counterparts. “Seeing water as closer when you’re thirsty might make it a little more likely you’ll try to go get it,” Balcetis says.

SA Mind Vol 21 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Closing the Gap: How Desire Affects Perceptions of Distance” in SA Mind Vol. 21 No. 3 (), p. 7
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0710-7b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe