Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Is it generally accepted that affordance can work in a negative way as well? I occasionally come across a web site that mixes in some sort of salient text (usually colored and underlined) that fools me into thinking they're links, when in fact, they aren't. I agree with David's definition, but given the frustrating experience I described, I may tweak it to read: A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or environment allude to a function. Wikipedia has a reasonable definition: An affordance is a quality of an object, or an environment, that allows an individual to perform an action. JJ Gibson's original use of the term focused on human activity as well as on the physical characteristics. When we orient ourselves to our environment we perceive ways in of acting in that environment; what can be manipulated, walked upon, thrown, etc., what can be dangerous and what can be used beneficially. The physical characteristics afford these opportunities for being acting upon, whether or not the designer of an artifact intended that us. Rob Tannen's link to a Corte77 posting (http://www.core77.com/reactor/ 03.07_parallel.asp) provides excellent examples of how affordances can suggest unintended, and often creative, uses of an object. In this framework I would not consider colored/underlined text as affording navigation or click-ability. Yes, its a learned association and yes, it can be used inconsistently, but I think Gibson's intent was to identify something about the relationahip between the physical world and humans that was deeper than context- specific learned associations. There is nothing intrinsically clickable about underlined text as opposed to bold or regular text, but small round physical objects afford throwing in a way that transcends context. There was a interesting study of remote controls conducted years ago in which a candy-bar shaped TV remote was compared with a spherical TV remote. The candy bar shaped remote tended to be held by one person, and occasionally passed to another; the sphere was more spontaneously thrown from one person to another. There might be novelty effect here, but in the context of this discussion, the two two shapes afforded different sorts of interactions. Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
On a tangentoal (sp?) note, perceivng affordances where others have not can be considered a sign of creativity or at least resourcefulness. A Core77 posting from last year featured examples of identifying affordances (although they don't describe it in those terms): http://www.core77.com/reactor/03.07_parallel.asp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Is it generally accepted that affordance can work in a negative way as
well? I occasionally come across a web site that mixes in some sort of
salient text (usually colored and underlined) that fools me into thinking
they're links, when in fact, they aren't.
I agree with David's definition, but given the frustrating experience I
described, I may tweak it to read:
A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or
environment allude to a function.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:17 AM, David Conrad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or
environment {inform the user of} its function.
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
You see, here's the problem...technically an affordance does not permit a certain type of use, but rather makes it clear through the object's form, location and generally the circumstances of its existence -- that the object is to be used in a particular way. That may very well be what you meant, but it's also an excellent example of why the term is less than perfectly communicative. Katie At 1:35 PM -0700 3/20/08, christine chastain wrote: I too, have become very careful in the use of the word in general but I find that in my work, most often the affordance of an object or experience is, quite simply, the qualities of that object or experience that permit it to be used in a specific way. -- Katie Albers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
%u2026 following my previous post Thus, in our brain exists neuron deputed to the coding of objective, named visuo-motor neuron (which match the intuition of Gibson). But, for how astonishing was this discovery, it was nothing in respect to the next step made by the Rizzolatti%u2019s group, that is, the discovery that some of these neuron does fire not only when the animal is to perform grasping, but also when the animal see another individual grasping. These neurons do not tell if the goal-oriented action is carried out by the individual they belong to or by another individual, there are sensible just to the goal that has to be pursued. Rizzolatti named these neurons %u201Cmirror neuron%u201D. The current interpretation is that mirror neuron allow to an animal to understand what other individuals are trying to do. When mirror neuron fires in a %u201Cpassive%u201D way they signal to the organism the same action that they signal when it is actually carried out. In this way an individual who observe put herself in the boots of the real actor of the scene. I understand what another does since this give rise in me a close neural activity to the one I produce when I perform that action. For a fancy introduction to mirror neuron http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3204/01.html For a proper understanding Rizzolatti, G. and Craighero, L. (2004). The Mirror-Neuron System. Annual Review of Neuroscience. vol27: 169%u2013192. The mirroring process mediated by these neurons allow us to know the world through the action we can perform in the world, and such performance would be defined by the intentional states we learn to generate along our social life, from birth forward. When children observe other people using cultural tools and artefacts, they often engage in the process of imitative learning in which they attempt to place themselves in the %u201Cintentional space%u201D of the user%u2014discerning the user%u2019s goal, what she is using the artefact %u201Cfor.%u201D By engaging in this imitative learning, the child joins the other person in affirming what %u201Cwe%u201D use this object %u201Cfor%u201D: we use hammers for hanging frames, a vacuum cleaner to make mommy happy, a refrigerator to prepare dinner. As children are involved in such intentional mirroring process they start to perceive objects and artefacts as elements that evoke, beyond basic sensory-motor affordances, another set of affordances, the intentional affordances, as named by Micheal Tomasello. Such affordances rest upon the understanding of the intentional relations that other persons have with that object or artefact%u2014that is, the intentional relations that other persons have to the world through the artefact. Affordances have a double nature that can be mutually supported and that is nested in the history of the artefacts and in their social evolution as well as in the ontogenetic development of each individual. Designing intentional affordances means allowing people that are going to use our new products the production of new intentions and goals that, perhaps, where not even thinkable before the creation of the new artefact. The interplay between sensory-motor and intentional affordances is an extremely interesting issue both for the cognitive scientist and for the designer, and the dynamics between them open new spaces for design that will act at the core of interaction design. With my colleague (Silvia, Leonardo, Maria) we have experimented both in establishing affordances for objects in young children (12-18 months) and in adults. You can find a first sketch of these researches here: Rizzo, A. (2006).The origin and design of intentional affordances. Invited Speech Proceedings of the 6th ACM Cconference on Designing Interactive systems %u2013. New York: ACM Press Sorry for the long post, Ciao antonio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Just out of sheer curiosity, is that essentially the same as saying,
A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or
environment {inform the user of} its function.
This seems a little more in-line with Robert's (well-put) definition.
On Mar 20,2008, at 12:20 , Angel Marquez wrote:
A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or
environment influence its function.
-Universal Principles of Design
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
A little more depth on this topic: The original meaning of affordance (in the context of Gibsonian psychology) is a RELATIONSHIP. The relationship exists between an actor and the environment and/or object. The classic example is that a chair affords sitting - but that is an oversimplification. It really about a very specific relationship meaning a specific chair, affording sitting to a certain actor under certain circumstances. The same chair that affords sitting to a small child, may not afford sitting to an adult when it collapses under the greater weight. Moreover, the existence of a relationship (affordance) is necessary, but not sufficient for the perception or ability to act on that relationship. I don't need to sit or even see the chair for the affordance of me sitting on that chair to exist. In fact, strictly speaking, the ability perceive the chair is in itself the result of an affordance. For example viewability requires a relationship between the actor (ability to detect optical information in a certain light spectrum) and the object/environment (transmitting or reflecting a specific light pattern with a particular spectrum). In practical terms, we should be careful in applying the term affordance too broadly. Effective design is about defining the components of the relationship and then bringing them together in the most appropriate manner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
I would agree that the term is less than perfectly communicative but from my own opinion I think this has come from Normans second interpretation of the term and where 'perceived affordances' has dirtied the waters and where Norman has openly admitted that has had to spend much time in clarifying his own interpretation. I believe thats where the problems have risen in discipline of IxD both terms by Gibson and Norman are being used and applied, however I would always recommend going back to the original term and the understanding as set out by Gibson, as many a time the term affordance is used to actually mean symbolic communication. So I am of the opinion to ever use only one to and to ensure that that the clarity of the term(it was recommended by a friend to use a drum to explain the concept too and what a affordances a drum provides, and move away from a door which I have found helpful in communicating the idea) as I truly believe affordances can provide a real insight for designers. Some really helpful material I have used if your interested further: Gaver, W. (1996). Affordances for interaction: The social is material for design. Ecological Psychology, 8(2). Gaver, W. (1991). Technology affordances. Proceedings of CHI, 1991 (New Orleans, Lousiana, USA, April 28 - May 2, 1991) ACM, New York. Joanna McGrenere and Wayne Ho (2000)Affordances: Clarifying and Evolving a Concept, Graphics Interface, pg 179--186 The use of affordances by Sellen Harper in the book the myth of the paperless office I have also found as a good application of the term in understanding paper. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Would you consider the term defined as
A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or
environment {inform the user of} its function.
To sufficiently clarify the following ?
-An affordance exists relative to the action capabilities of a
particular actor.
-The existence of an affordance is independent of the actor%u2019s
ability to perceive it.
-An affordance does not change as the needs and goals of the actor
change.
Which is referenced from the paper of McGrenere Ho (2000)
And I think the FOX car is great example of how design has a need to
fully appreciate the term and understand its application, as users do
blame themselves.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Because the word has been used increasingly loosely -- as you've described -- I don't use it any more. When I used it, I wound up having to go through an explanation of what an affordance really is -- or why it's different from what they think it means. Not using the term saves me the Battle of the Competing Definitions...and I wind up where I want to much more quickly than I otherwise do. Katie At 5:57 PM -0700 3/19/08, Christopher Hlavaty wrote: In the discipline of IxD, the word has been used to define a possible action perceived by a user within some environment (Norman 1988). In the classic example, the affordance of a door with a flat metal plate is push. The affordance resolves to a verb, an action to be performed. However, of late, I've seen the word used loosely to describe the clues that suggest an object's possible actions. Applied in a colloquial sense to the classic example above, the affordance is the flat metal plate. Another example of this usage would be gloss applied to the visual design of a UI button. The gloss itself is the affordance, as opposed to the action click. I'm curious as to the community's opinion on this matter. How do you use the word in your day to day discussions? Is it appropriate to use the term both ways? Appreciate your opinions, -- chris hlavaty Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help -- Katie Albers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
I use it to mean, the impression an object conveys that it can be acted on. Very broad and general. The idea is that affordance is a quality that some objects have that says touch/manipulate me and something will happen. This quality is dependent on context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Christopher Hlavaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the discipline of IxD, the word has been used to define a possible action perceived by a user within some environment (Norman 1988). In the classic example, the affordance of a door with a flat metal plate is push. The affordance resolves to a verb, an action to be performed. However, of late, I've seen the word used loosely to describe the clues that suggest an object's possible actions... Don Norman also saw that discrepancy, and at some point revised it to perceivable affordance. I'll use the word around other designers, but for other audiences I'm careful to define it as I go. Victor Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Victor Lombardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don Norman also saw that discrepancy, and at some point revised it to perceivable affordance. I just found the link: Affordances and Design http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/affordances_and.html Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Chris, I don't think the second 'definition' you laid out is correct. Affordance is not an object (metal plate), or a quality assigned to an object (glossiness); it is the perceived action associated with or communicated by an object. I can see where the issue might get confused, and perhaps some designers just find it easier to explain affordance to clients by pointing to the glossy shine of a button and saying This is affordance. Right here. Jared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
I think it's both :-) Affordance is the noun, the perceived clue that suggests an action (based upon context, situation, goals, etc.). Afford is the verb, like what does this object afford, or the particular action the user would perform based upon the clue perceived. (a chair affords sitting, a window affords looking) As Paul Dourish says, Technically, an affordance is a property of the environment that affords action to appropriately equipped organisms...an affordance is a three-way relationship between the environment, organism, and an activity. This three-way relationship is at the heart of ecological psychology, and the challenge of ecological psychology lies in how it is centered on the notion of an organism acting in an environment: being in the world (from Where The Action Is) Personally, I like to frame affordance as a matter of communication: This reflexive relationship [referring to language and interaction] becomes more evident by looking at the affordances and constraints upon interaction of everyday real objects. Through affordances a design speaks to users, provoking or inviting an encounter to ensue. Its level of success depends on the clarity, appropriateness, and conceptual linkage of the affordance to the user's goals and expectations...Affordances are a form of communication, telling the user what's possible with a design--and constraining him to that possibility by virtue of materials, mechanics, etc. (from Thoughts on Interaction) Hope that helps... Uday Gajendar Sr. Interaction Designer Voice Technology Group Cisco | San Jose -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 408 902 2137 Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Seriously, this is actually very good... From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordances An affordance is the quality of an object, or an environment, that allows an individual to perform action. The term is used in a variety of fields: perceptual psychology, cognitive psychology, environmental psychology, industrial design, human–computer interaction (HCI), interaction design and artificial intelligence. As explained below, two different definitions have developed. The original definition describes all action possibilities that are physically possible; a refinement to that definition describes action possibilities that the actor is aware of. Affordances as action possibilities Psychologist James J. Gibson originally introduced the term in his 1977 article The Theory of Affordances[1] and explored it more fully in his book The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception[2] in 1979. He defined affordances as all action possibilities latent in the environment, objectively measurable and independent of the individual's ability to recognize them, but always in relation to the actor and therefore dependent on their capabilities. For instance, a set of steps which rises four feet high does not afford the act of climbing if the actor is a crawling infant. Gibson's is the prevalent definition in cognitive psychology. Jakob von Uexküll had already discussed the concept in the early twentieth century[3], calling it the functional colouring (funktionale Tönung) of objects. Affordances as perceived action possibilities In 1988, Donald Norman appropriated the term affordances in the context of Human–Machine Interaction to refer to just those action possibilities which are readily perceivable by an actor. Through his book The Design of Everyday Things,[4] this interpretation was popularized within the fields of HCI and interaction design. It makes the concept dependent not only on the physical capabilities of the actor, but also their goals, plans, values, beliefs and past experience. If an actor steps into a room with an armchair and a softball, Gibson's original definition of affordances allows that the actor may toss the recliner and sit on the softball, because that is objectively possible. Norman's definition of (perceived) affordances captures the likelihood that the actor will sit on the recliner and toss the softball. Effectively, Norman's affordances suggest how an object may be interacted with. For example, the size and shape of a softball obviously fits nicely in the average human hand, and its density and texture make it perfect for throwing. The user may also bring past experience with similar objects (baseballs, perhaps) to bear when evaluating a new affordance. Norman's 1988 definition makes the concept of affordance relational, rather than subjective or objective. This he deemed an ecological approach, which is related to systems-theoretic approaches in the natural and social sciences. The focus on perceived affordances is much more pertinent to practical design problems from a human-factors approach, which may explain its widespread adoption. Norman later explained that this adaptation of the term had been unintended.[5][6] However, the definition from his book has become established enough in HCI that both uses have to be accepted as convention in this field. On Mar 20, 2008, at 8:04 AM, Jared Christensen wrote: Chris, I don't think the second 'definition' you laid out is correct. Affordance is not an object (metal plate), or a quality assigned to an object (glossiness); it is the perceived action associated with or communicated by an object. I can see where the issue might get confused, and perhaps some designers just find it easier to explain affordance to clients by pointing to the glossy shine of a button and saying This is affordance. Right here. Jared Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
I use it to mean, the impression an object conveys that it can be acted on. I think of it more as an aspect of a design that communicates how a person can interact with an object. -r- Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
A property in which the physical characteristics of an object or environment influence its function. -Universal Principles of Design Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
I too, have become very careful in the use of the word in general but I find that in my work, most often the affordance of an object or experience is, quite simply, the qualities of that object or experience that permit it to be used in a specific way. Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
[IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
In the discipline of IxD, the word has been used to define a possible action perceived by a user within some environment (Norman 1988). In the classic example, the affordance of a door with a flat metal plate is push. The affordance resolves to a verb, an action to be performed. However, of late, I've seen the word used loosely to describe the clues that suggest an object's possible actions. Applied in a colloquial sense to the classic example above, the affordance is the flat metal plate. Another example of this usage would be gloss applied to the visual design of a UI button. The gloss itself is the affordance, as opposed to the action click. I'm curious as to the community's opinion on this matter. How do you use the word in your day to day discussions? Is it appropriate to use the term both ways? Appreciate your opinions, -- chris hlavaty Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] DEFINE: Affordance
Hi, Christopher! If you think is difficult to define Affordance,
try to translate it to other languages, like Portuguese!
I've discussed that with my students back in Brazil and in China,
and -- in the translation process -- I came with the idea of
purpose. But that's just me!
...
{ Itamar Medeiros } Information Designer
designing clear, understandable communication by
caring to structure, context, and presentation
of data and information
website ::: http://designative.info/
mobile ::: 86 13671503252
skype ::: designative
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=27380
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
