New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

What You See Is What You Say

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.


Psychologists argue over whether language influences how people think. It could, however, affect half of what they see. The view from the right eye is processed in the brain's left hemisphere, which also seems to handle language. Investigators at the University of Chicago and the University of California, Berkeley, tested how well the right and left fields of view distinguish between the colors known in English as blue and green. Most of the world's languages actually use a single word for the two, suggesting that for English speakers, language influences the discrimination between blue and green. The researchers found native English speakers were faster at distinguishing bluish squares from greener ones if the differently colored square appeared within the right visual field. This effect vanished if the volunteers had to rehearse simultaneously an eight-digit number, which distracted their verbal working memory. Look for the findings in the January 10 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 294 Issue 3This article was published with the title “What You See Is What You Say” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 294 No. 3 (), p. 32
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0306-32d

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe