Database results:
examBoard: AQA
examType: GCSE
lessonTitle: Gilchrist and Nesberg Study
One of the most fascinating aspects of psychology is how our inner states can affect what we actually see in the world around us. The Gilchrist and Nesberg study is a classic experiment that shows how our needs and motivations can literally change our perception.
Key Definitions:
Title: "Need as a Determinant of Perception" (1952)
Researchers: John C. Gilchrist and Anita Nesberg
Aim: To investigate whether physiological needs (hunger) affect perception of related objects (food).
Key Question: Do hungry people literally see food-related images differently than those who aren't hungry?
Gilchrist and Nesberg designed a clever experiment to test whether hunger would affect how people perceive images related to food.
The researchers used a tachistoscope (a device that displays an image for a very brief time) to show participants various images, including food-related and non-food-related pictures. They then asked participants to report when they could first recognise what was in the images.
The key manipulation was food deprivation - some participants were tested after not eating for several hours (hungry condition), while others were tested after eating (non-hungry condition).
The study used 32 male university students who were randomly assigned to either:
This created a between-subjects design where each participant only experienced one condition.
Here's what happened during the experiment:
Participants were shown a series of 12 images using a tachistoscope, including:
Each image was initially shown for a very brief time (too quick to recognise), then gradually increased in exposure time until the participant could identify what they were seeing.
Researchers recorded the minimum exposure time needed for each participant to correctly identify each image.
The results of the study revealed something fascinating about how our needs affect our perception:
Hungry participants recognised food-related images significantly faster than non-hungry participants. They needed less exposure time to identify what they were seeing when it was food-related.
For the neutral (non-food) images, there was no significant difference between the hungry and non-hungry groups in recognition time.
This supported the researchers' hypothesis that physiological needs (like hunger) can influence perceptual sensitivity specifically for objects related to that need.
One participant in the hungry group could identify a hamburger image in just 15 milliseconds of exposure, while a non-hungry participant needed 32 milliseconds to recognise the same image. This demonstrates how motivation can lower our perceptual threshold for relevant stimuli.
Think about times when you've been really hungry and suddenly noticed all the food adverts around you that you might normally ignore!
Why did hungry people recognise food images faster? Gilchrist and Nesberg suggested that:
The findings from Gilchrist and Nesberg's study have several practical applications:
Food advertisers often target hungry audiences (like showing food ads around dinner time) because people are more likely to notice and respond to food images when hungry.
Understanding that physical states affect perception helps teachers recognise that hungry students may be distracted or focused on food rather than learning.
Doctors can better understand how patients' physical needs might affect their reporting of symptoms or attention to health information.
The Gilchrist and Nesberg study connects to other important concepts in perception:
Next time you're hungry, pay attention to whether food adverts or restaurant signs seem to "jump out" at you more than usual. Are you noticing food-related stimuli faster or more often than when you're not hungry?
This simple self-observation can help you understand the Gilchrist and Nesberg effect in your everyday life!
The Gilchrist and Nesberg study provides compelling evidence that our motivational states (like hunger) can affect our perceptual processes. Specifically, being hungry makes us quicker to recognise food-related images, while not affecting our perception of unrelated objects.
This research highlights the fascinating relationship between our internal needs and how we literally see the world around us. It shows that perception isn't just a passive process of receiving information through our senses, but an active process influenced by our current motivational states.
Understanding this relationship helps explain why we might notice certain things more readily in different situations and demonstrates that perception is a complex interaction between our sensory systems and our internal states.
Log in to track your progress and mark lessons as complete!
Login NowDon't have an account? Sign up here.