The present study was motivated by a theory, which proposes that speech includes articulatory gestures that are connected to particular hand actions. We hypothesized that certain articulatory gestures would be more associated with the precision grip than with the power grip, and vice versa. In the study, the participants pronounced a syllable and performed simultaneously a precision or power grip that was theorized to be either congruent or incongruent with the syllable. Relatively fast precision grip responses were associated with articulatory gestures in which the tip of the tongue contacted the alveolar ridge ([te]) or the aperture of the vocal tract remained small ([hi]), as well as gestures that required lip protrusion ([pu]). In contrast, relatively fast power grip responses were associated with gestures that were produced by moving the back of the tongue against the velum ([ke]) or in which the aperture of the vocal tract remained large ([hα]). In addition to demonstrating that certain articulatory gestures are systematically connected to different grip types, the study may shed some light on discussion concerning sound symbolism and evolution of speech.

A series of experiments provided converging support for the hypothesis that action preparation biases selective attention to action-congruent object features. When visual transients are masked in so-called change-blindness scenes, viewers are blind to substantial changes between 2 otherwise identical pictures that flick back and forth. The authors report data in which participants planned a grasp prior to the onset of a change-blindness scene in which 1 of 12 objects changed identity. Change blindness was substantially reduced for grasp-congruent objects (e.g., planning a whole-hand grasp reduced change blindness to a changing apple). A series of follow-up experiments ruled out an alternative explanation that this reduction had resulted from a labeling or strategizing of responses and provided converging support that the effect genuinely arose from grasp planning.

Four experiments are described in which 1 visual object (the target) was selected from another (the distractor) according to its color (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) or its relative location (Experiment 3) and then was classified according to a simple geometric property. Object classification was signaled as fast as possible by a precision or power grip response, and this grip was either compatible or incompatible with either object. When targets were selected by color, target-compatible grip responses were facilitated, but distractor-compatible grip responses were impaired. When targets were selected by location, similar results were obtained for target-compatible grip responses, but not distractor-compatible grip responses. These data are explained in terms of the involvement of action codes in object-level selection.

It has been demonstrated that the task-irrelevant left-right orientation of an object is capable of facilitating left-right-hand responses when the object is orientated towards the responding hand. We investigated the role of attention in this orientation effect. Experiment 1 showed that object orientation facilitates responses of the hand that is compatible with the object's orientation, despite the entire object being irrelevant. However, when a task-relevant fixation point was displayed over the prime object in Experiment 2, the effect was not observed. Together Experiments 1 and 2 suggest that the orientation information of viewed objects primes the action selection processes even when the object is irrelevant, but only when attention is not allocated to a competing stimulus during the prime presentation. Experiment 3 suggested that the elimination of the effect in Experiment 2 could not be attributed to the elimination of an attentional shift to the graspable part of the prime. Finally, Experiment 4 showed that object orientation can evoke an abstract response code, influencing the selection of finger responses.

No abstract