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
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):
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
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
%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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
20 matches
Mail list logo
