March 4, 2012

Hunger Affects What We See

When our body needs something, like food, the brain tends to open a fast track for perceiving that specific thing. Christie Nicholson reports

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Mind

Apple | Spotify | RSS

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Hunger is the best sauce. And it affects perceptions of anything related to food. Even words.

Researchers tested two groups. One group just had lunch. The other hadn't eaten in four hours.

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.

The subjects watched computer screens as 80 words flashed by, each for about 1/300^th of a second--that's too short to read the words, but just long enough to reach the threshold of conscious awareness. One quarter of the words were food-related. The rest were neutral non-food related words.

After each word flashed by, the subjects were slowly shown that word and another word. For example, if the flashed word was bread, the subjects might then be slowly shown the words bread and glove. And they were asked which word had previously flashed by.

Hungry subjects were better at recognizing that they'd seen the food-related words than other words, and reported that food words were brighter than the neutral words. The research is in the journal Psychological Science.

Highly desirable stimuli seem more likely than other information to find a fast track to our conscious awareness. Which is probably an important ability for evolution to have cobbled into our nervous systems.

--Christie Nicholson

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

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