The mere perception of manipulable objects usually grasped with a power-grip (e.g., an apple) or a precision-grip (e.g., a cherry) potentiate power-grip- and precision-grip-responses, respectively. This effect is seen as to be driven by automatic access of the representation of manipulable objects that includes a motor representation of usually performed grasping behaviors (i.e., the embodied view). Nevertheless, a competing account argues that this effect could be due to an overlapping of size codes used to represent both manipulable objects and response options. Indeed, objects usually grasped with a power- and a precision-grip (e.g., an apple vs. a cherry) could be coded as large- and small-objects, respectively; and power- and precision-grip responses as large- and small-responses, respectively. We conducted 4 experiments to test this hypothesis. In Experiment 1, the response device usually used in studies reporting a potentiation effect is fixed horizontally (the grasping component of responses was removed). We instructed participants to press the small-switch with their index-digit and the large-switch with their palm-hand. In line with the size-coding-hypothesis, responses on the small-switch performed with the index-digit led to shorter RTs when objects usually associated with a precision-grip (e.g., a cherry) were presented compared to objects usually associated with a power-grip (e.g., an apple). A reverse pattern was obtained for responses on the large-switch performed with the palm-hand. In Experiments 2, 3 and 4, we went further by investigating which factors of Experiment 1 allow the size coding of responses: the size of switch and/or the size of the effector part used. Data confirmed the critical involvement of the size of switches and the possible involvement of the size of the effector part used. Thus, data support the possibility that the potentiation of grasping is due to a compatibility/incompatibility between size codes rather than involving motor representations of usually performed grasping behaviors as advocated in several embodied views. Moreover, data support the possibility that responses are coded thanks to a size code that extends the Theory of Event Coding.

通常，分别通过Power-grip（例如，苹果）或Precision-grip（例如，樱桃）掌握可操纵对象的能力，就分别增强了power-grip-和grip-grip-respons。可以看到这种效果是由可操作对象的表示的自动访问所驱动的，该对象包括通常执行的抓握行为（即，具体化的视图）的运动表示。然而，一个有争议的帐户认为，这种影响可能是由于用于表示可操纵对象和响应选项的尺寸代码重叠所致。确实，通常可以用力和精确抓握的对象（例如，苹果与樱桃）可以分别编码为大对象和小对象。功率和精确抓地力响应分别为大响应和小响应。我们进行了4个实验以检验该假设。在实验1中，报告增强作用的研究中通常使用的响应设备水平固定（去除了响应的抓取部分）。我们指示参与者按下带有索引数字的小开关，并用手掌按下大开关。与大小编码假说相符的是，与通常与精确抓地力相关的对象（例如樱桃）相比，当呈现通常与精确抓地力相关的对象（例如樱桃）时，使用索引数字执行的小开关上的响应导致较短的RT。电源手柄（例如，一个苹果）。对于手掌执行的大开关，获得了相反的模式。在实验2、3和4中，我们进一步研究了实验1的哪些因素允许响应的大小编码：开关的尺寸和/或使用的效应器部件的尺寸。数据证实了开关尺寸的关键参与以及所使用的效应器部件尺寸的可能参与。因此，数据支持这样的可能性，即抓握的增强是由于尺寸代码之间的兼容性/不兼容性，而不是像在几个具体化的视图中所主张的那样，涉及通常执行的抓握行为的运动表现。此外，由于扩展了事件编码理论的大小代码，数据支持对响应进行编码的可能性。数据支持抓握的增强可能是由于尺寸代码之间的兼容/不兼容，而不是像几个具体化视图中所主张的那样涉及通常执行的抓握行为的运动表示。此外，由于扩展了事件编码理论的大小代码，数据支持对响应进行编码的可能性。数据支持抓握的增强可能是由于尺寸代码之间的兼容/不兼容，而不是像几个具体化视图中所主张的那样涉及通常执行的抓握行为的运动表示。此外，由于扩展了事件编码理论的大小代码，数据支持对响应进行编码的可能性。