You have likely experienced the phenomenon. Perhaps it occurred on the walk from the train after an exhausting day at the office. Or maybe you noticed it on the uphill trek to class while lugging a backpack stuffed with textbooks. That hill looming in front of you—surmountable most days and probably no more than a few degrees incline —right now looks more like Mount Everest. Likewise, the six-block walk from the train appears to stretch for miles. The way our surroundings look seems to change based on the state of our bodies. When we’re tired, out of shape, or loaded down, the environment can look quite daunting. And if our surroundings appear too challenging to move through, we may be less likely to do so. We might stop walking or call off our run if the distance looks too far or the hill looks too steep. In a dynamic and interactive way, our bodies influence they way we see the world around us, which can impact the way we move—or decide not to move—within it.

This phenomenon is not just anecdotal. Studies have found empirical support for the embodied nature of visual perception. Furthermore, research suggests that it is not only our physical states that alter the way we view the world, but our mental states as well. Understanding these mind and body interactions is important. Systematic misperceptions of the environment have implications for health and fitness. In this article, we’ll discuss research linking mind and body states to visual experiences, and we’ll emphasize the importance of developing interventions that shift perceptual experiences in ways that help people move more and work towards meeting their exercise goals.

Embodied visual perception (or ‘How Ryan Gosling sees the world’)

Visual perception is rooted in bodily states. In much the same way that our bodies can influence our thoughts, they can also affect our perceptions of how the world looks. An 18-year-old standing next to a 90-year-old at the bottom of a grassy hill may perceive the slope to be less steep than his wobbly neighbor. If Ryan Gosling stands next to Michael Moore looking down the length of Hollywood Boulevard, it’s likely the chiseled Gosling will perceive the distance to the Dolby Theater as closer than will the stouter Moore. Differences in body types and physical capabilities can produce differences in the way people see the environment.

Researchers have found empirical support for the notion that perception may depend on the physical resources we have available to us at any given moment. In one study, elderly and overweight people perceived the steepness of a hill to be greater than did younger, slimmer participants (Bhalla & Proffitt, 1999). In another study, people who suffered from chronic pain and were less capable of moving around perceived distances as further away than did healthier people (Witt, Linkenauger, Bakdash, Augustyn, Cook, & Proffitt, 2009).

Just as chronic, stable differences in fitness or physical prowess can affect the way people perceive their environment, so too can fleeting bodily states. In a recent study, researchers manipulated people’s energy states and tested the effects on perceptions of the slope of a hill (Schnall, Zadra, & Proffitt, 2010). The researchers first required participants to perform a boring and tiring task that sapped glucose levels and depleted their energy. The participants then consumed either a fruit drink sweetened with sugar, which provided glucose and boosted their energy, or a fruit drink sweetened with non-caloric sugar substitute, which provided no glucose or energy. Importantly, participants didn’t know which of the two they drank. Then researchers asked participants to stand in front of a large hill and estimate how steep the hill they saw before them looked. Those participants who drank the artificially-sweetened drink—those with low energy—perceived the hill as steeper than participants who drank the sugar-sweetened drink. The amount of physical energy people have influences their perceptual experiences of the world around them.

The mind matters:  Visual perception is motivated

Just as our bodies can impact our perceptual experiences of the world, so can our minds. Visual perception is not only embodied but is motivated as well. Recent studies from our lab suggest the strength of people’s motivations can influence how far away an object appears. In our studies, some participants saw items that were highly desirable and relevant to their goals and others saw items that were not. They then estimated how far away the objects appeared (Balcetis & Dunning, 2010). For example, in one of the studies, we placed a bottle of water a certain distance away from the participants. Some of the participants had just eaten salty pretzels, and others had just drank several glasses of water. We asked how far away the water bottle appeared. The thirsty participants who were presumably more motivated to drink the water perceived the water bottle as closer than did the quenched participants. People’s psychological states—their goals and motivations to attain an object—influenced how close the object appeared.

Such research may provide important insights into how people are able to persevere when their physical resources are scarce.  As any runner, rock climber, or cross country skier can attest, energy does not come solely from the body. In addition to physical resources, people’s mental resources influence their ability to take on difficult tasks. Consider the New York City Marathon. On the morning of the race, tens of thousands of runners stand at the entrance to the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge in Staten Island and gear up for the 26.2 miles (about 42 km) ahead of them. As the runners weave their way through the five boroughs of the city, they face physical and mental challenges. The most formidable of those challenges occurs for many runners at about mile 20 (about 30 km). It is around this time in the race, as they cross the Willis Avenue Bridge and head into the Bronx, that many runners hit “the wall.” Physiological cues such as exhaustion, dehydration, and severe muscle fatigue suggest the runner’s physical energy is nearly spent. And it nearly is. The average human body can only store about 18-20 miles’ worth of energy-producing glycogen, and runners at that point have quite literally run out of fuel (Latta, 2003). In spite of that, many marathoners are able to push through and continue their run. At the last NYC marathon in 2011, 99 percent of runners—47,340 out of the 47,763 who started—crossed the finish line.           

How do people continue on when their physical resources are spent? As 1980 Boston Marathon winner Jacqueline Gareau said “The body does not want you to do this. As you run, it tells you to stop. But the mind must be strong. It is not age; it is not diet. It is the will to succeed” (Luff, 2013). Psychological states can be powerful determinants of people’s ability to take on physical tasks. A comprehensive analysis of Olympic athletes found that what distinguishes winning Olympic athletes from losing ones is not only differences in physical preparation and prowess but also, and sometimes even more so, differences in psychological qualities such as confidence, commitment, and motivation (Greenleaf, Gould, & Dieffenbach, 2001). Motivation and drive can lead to feelings that one is energized, and can even increase cardiovascular responses associated with gearing up for action. For example, when people are motivated to take on challenging tasks, systolic blood pressure—a marker of the body’s readiness to act—increases (Gendolla & Richter, 2005; Wright, 1996). Psychological factors can act as sources of energy as people engage in activity in the world around them. Just like for the marathoners struggling against extreme fatigue and facing “the wall,” psychological resources and willpower are particularly important when people are tired or physical resources are nearly spent. One way people may overcome exhaustion and resist the urge to quit is by seeing the world as easier to traverse, a visual “trick” that can occur when people are highly motivated.

In one study, we how physical and mental resources interact to influence perceptions. Specifically, we tested people’s perceptions of distance to a finish line as a function of both their physical fitness and the strength of their motivation to make it there (Cole, Balcetis, & Zhang, 2013). We first measured waist-to-hip ratios to gauge people’s physical states; people with higher waist-to-hip ratios are generally less physically fit. Then participants learned they would perform a difficult physical task we referred to as a weighted walking test. In the task, participants had to wear heavy ankle weights while walking quickly to a finish line with a challenging gait. For unfit participants, just like marathon runners at the point of exhaustion, the demands of the task may seem to outweigh the physical resources they have at their disposal.

We then manipulated how motivated participants would be to perform the task. Specifically, we told half of participants they had done poorly on a series of initial fitness tests and so to be considered physically fit they had to perform well on the weighted walking test. Unsurprisingly, these participants reported being very motivated to ace the last test to demonstrate their fitness. We told the other half of participants that they had performed well in the first tests and their performance on the weighted walking test would do little to affect their overall score, as they were already deemed physically fit. These participants reported feeling rather unmotivated to do well since they had already demonstrated their superior fitness. We measured perception and found that among participants who were physically unfit but psychologically motivated, the distance seemed short. In fact, it seemed just as short as it did for people who were actually fit. Strong motivations seemed to trump deficient physical resources, giving people the impression that their environment was easier to traverse.

This led us to ask if feeling energized impacts perceptions of the environment in the same way that being physically energized does. Perhaps when people are motivated they feel psychologically energized, and just as do sugary beverages or physical virility, it affects the way people see the world.

To test the concept, we again enlisted participants to complete a weighted walking test, but before they did, they drank a cold cup of tea (Cole & Balcetis, 2013). We told some the tea was a special energy-producing tea containing a stimulant that enhances alertness and energetic feelings. We told others that the tea contained a sedative that increases relaxation and reduces energetic feelings. All of the participants actually drank the same, non-caffeinated, Lipton herbal tea. The tea contained no stimulants or calories and was not able to influence physical energy. Nonetheless, those participants who drank the tea that they thought would energize them reported feeling more awake, invigorated, and energized than those participants who drank the tea they thought would calm them. And their distance estimates reflected the difference. Participants who believed they drank the energy tea perceived the distance to the finish line to be shorter than participants who believed they drank the calming tea. Feeling energized had the same effect on perception as actually being physically energized. The mind, as well as the body, exert a powerful influence over how people see the world around them.

Seeing is for doing

Why would energy, regardless of whether physical or psychological in nature, influence perception? One theory is that it may help to guide action (Proffitt, 2006; Cole & Balcetis, 2013). Visual perception may take cues from physical and psychological states in order to inform decisions about how and whether to act. When people are tired, unfit, or unmotivated, the environment may appear more cumbersome or monstrous. If it appears difficult to traverse, people may subsequently forego attempts at moving within it. Conversely, when people are well-rested, fit, or motivated the environment may appear easier to traverse and people may be more likely to act within it. The embodied nature of visual perception is likely to be, for the most part, an adaptive and important step in the regulation of behavior as people look around the environment and weigh the costs and benefits of moving within it.

However, it is possible that this process may actually backfire in some cases. If perception is influenced by energy and helps to regulate action, this process may help to explain some alarming trends. Consider the current worldwide obesity epidemic. More than 1.4 billion adults, and 40 million children under the age of five, are overweight or obese around the world (WHO, 2013). One primary cause of obesity is insufficient exercise. Less than half of American adults get the recommended amount of daily activity prescribed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2012). In addition, obese individuals are approximately 28 percent less likely than average-weight Americans to exercise frequently (Mendes, 2011). It is possible that obese or overweight individuals aren’t exercising enough because they literally see the world in ways that may be disastrous to good health. The distance to the end of the block may look more daunting or the hill may appear more precipitous. The visual cues that physically unfit individuals receive from their environment suggest their travels may be more difficult and they may choose then to refrain. In such cases, the embodied nature of visual perception, which may usually help regulate our behavior in beneficial ways, might actually be hurting people who are overweight or obese. It may perpetuate a cycle of inactivity that leads to further weight gain.  

To counter the effect, people may need to learn to rein in, overcome, or counteract their embodied visual experiences. Researchers can use what they know from recent studies to develop effective strategies for shifting people’s experiences of their environment. For example, people see things they consider desirable as closer to them than things that are actually equally far away but undesirable. A $100 bill that people had the chance to win appeared closer than a $100 bill they had no shot at winning (Balcetis & Dunning, 2010). The same distance can look shorter the more appealing, desirable, exciting, or pleasant the thing at the end of the space. Based on this finding, it seems possible to design strategies that might change perceptions of the environment. For instance, one might increase the appeal of either getting to the finish line or the allure of the metaphoric carrot at the end of the stick. Such mental trickery, aimed at increasing the charm, appeal, or magnetism of the goal, might result in it appearing closer.  These and other suggestions might induce perceptual experiences that encourage action, exercise, and movement.

Disembodied visual perception

One open research question is whether visual perception is ever disembodied. Are there situations in which people’s perceptual experiences do not depend on the states of their bodies? Although this question is still an open one, some recent research suggests shifting people’s mindsets might influence the extent to which they rely on bodily states when making perceptual judgments (Maglio & Trope, 2012). Embodied perception studies have found that people perceive distances to be greater when they are wearing heavy backpacks (see Proffitt, 2006). However, this effect appears to go away when people adopt a more abstract, compared to concrete, mindset (Maglio & Trope, 2012). This research suggests visual perception can be divorced from states of the body in certain circumstances. Much like the researchers who have recently called for further exploration into the true nature of embodied cognition (Wilson & Golonka, 2013), we suggest the future of embodied visual perception should include test cases under which visual perception may not be influenced by the body or the mind. In addition, exploring whether other sensory modalities, such as hearing or smelling, are influenced by physical or mental states is a fruitful avenue for further research.

Conclusion

In a recent interview, marathon runner Nathan Walkowicz described one strategy he uses during training: He thinks about the entire run as if he’s just running the distance around his neighborhood block at home (Bayoff, 2013). He pictures first running to his mailbox, then running to the stop sign at the corner, and so on. By shifting his experience so that every checkpoint seems within reach, he tricks himself into believing that the finish line is close which helps him continue on. In much the same way, visual perceptions of the environment may be distorted to enable us to effectively meet and manage goals. As recent and ongoing work suggests, visual perception is sensitive to current and chronic physical and psychological states in the service of regulating action.

References

Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2010). Wishful seeing: Desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science, 21, 147-152.

Bayoff, L. (2013). Nathan Walkowicz runs first marathon for campus school. Confidential. Retried on June 30, 2013 from: http://conteconfidentialbc.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/nathan-walkowicz-ru…

Bhalla, M., & Proffitt, D. R. (1999). Visual-motor recalibration in geographical slant perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 1076-1096. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012). Facts about physical activity. Retrieved on June 30, 2013 from: http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/data/facts.html

Cole, S., & Balcetis, E. (2013). Bioenergetic and psychoenergetic resources influence distance perception. Social Cognition, 31, 721-732.

Cole, S., Balcetis, E., & Zhang, S. (2013). Visual perception and regulatory conflict: Motivation and physiology influence distance perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 18-22.

Gendolla, G.H.E., & Richter, M. (2005). Ego-involvement and mental effort: Cardiovascular, electrodermal, and performance effects. Psychophysiology, 42, 595-603.

Greenleaf, C., Gould, D., & Dieffenbach, K. (2001). Factors influencing Olympic performance: Interviews with Atlanta and Nagano U.S. Olympians. Journal of Sport Psychology, 13, 154-184.

Latta, S. (2003). Hitting “The Wall”: If you understand the scientific reasons behind “The Wall” you should be able to avoid it. Marathon & Beyond. Retrieved on June 29, 2013 from: http://www.marathonandbeyond.com/choices/latta.htm

Luff, C. (2013). Quotes about running marathons. Retrieved on June 29, 2013 from: http://running.about.com/od/runninghumor/tp /mara thonquotes.htm

Maglio, S.J., & Trope, Y. (2012). Disembodiment: Abstract construal attenuates the influence of contextual bodily state in judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 211-216.

Mendes, E. (2011). In U.S., frequent exercise rebounds slightly in 2010. Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. Retrieved on June 30, 2013 from: http://www.gallup.com/poll/146132/frequent-exercise-rebounds-slightly-2…

Proffitt, D.R. (2006). Embodied perception and the economy of action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 110-122.

Schnall, S., Zadra, J. R., & Proffitt, D. R. (2010). Direct evidence for the economy of action: Glucose and the perception of geographical slant. Perception, 39, 464-482.

Wilson, A.D., & Golonka, S. (2013). Embodied cognition is not what you think it is. Frontiers in Psychology, 4: 58.

Witt, J. K., Linkenauger, S. A., Bakdash, J. Z., Augustyn, J. A., Cook, A. S., & Proffitt, D. R. (2009). The long road of pain: Chronic pain increases perceived distance. Experimental Brain Research, 192, 145-148.

World Health Organization (2013). Obesity and overweight fact sheet. Retrieved on June 30, 2013 from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/

Wright, R. A. (1996). Brehm's theory of motivation as a model of effort and cardiovascular response. In P. M. Gollwitzer and J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 424-453). New York: Guilford.