![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
As a concept, affordance is integral to scholarly analysis across multiple fields—including media studies, science and technology studies, communication studies, ecological psychology, and design studies among others. Critics, however, rightly point to the following shortcomings: definitional confusion, a false binary in which artifacts either afford or do not, and failure to account for diverse subject-artifact relations. Addressing these critiques, this article demarcates the mechanisms of affordance—as artifacts request, demand, allow, encourage, discourage, and refuse—which take shape through interrelated conditions: perception, dexterity, and cultural and institutional legitimacy. Together, the mechanisms and conditions constitute a dynamic and structurally situated model that addresses how artifacts afford, for whom and under what circumstances.
References
|
Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15, 181-195. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Cooper, A., Reimann, R., Cronin, D., Noessel, C., Csizmadi, J., LeMoine, D. (2014). About face: The essentials of interaction design (4th ed.). Indianapolis, IN: John Wiley. (Original work published 1995) Google Scholar | |
|
Cooper, J. (2006). The digital divide: The special case of gender. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 320-334. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Evans, S. K., Pearce, K. E., Vitak, J., Treem, J. (2017). Explicating affordances: A conceptual framework for understanding affordances in communication research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22, 35-52. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Faraj, S., Azad, B. (2012). The materiality of technology: An affordance perspective. In Leonardi, P. M., Nardi, B. A., Kallinikos, J. (Eds.), Materiality and organizing (pp. 237-258). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Google Scholar | |
|
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Google Scholar | |
|
Hargittai, E., Litt, E. (2013). Facebook fired? The role of Internet skill in people’s job-related privacy practices online. IEEE Security & Privacy, 11(3), 38-45. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35, 441-456. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Latour, B. (1994). On technical mediation: Philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29-64. Google Scholar | |
|
McGrenere, J., Ho, W. (2000). Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept. Proceedings from Graphics Interface 2000. Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Retrieved from http://teaching.polishedsolid.com/spring2006/iti/read/affordances.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Nagy, P., Neff, G. (2015). Imagined affordance: Reconstructing a keyword for communication theory. Social Media + Society, 1(2). Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2056305115603385 Google Scholar | |
|
Neff, G., Jordan, T., McVeigh-Schultz, J., Gillespie, T. (2012). Affordances, technical agency, and the politics of technologies of cultural production. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 299-313. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books. Google Scholar | |
|
Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. Interact, 6, 38-42. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement: A sociological approach. Basingstoke, England: MacMillan. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Oliver, M. (2005). The problem with affordance. E-Learning, 2, 402-413. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Parchoma, G. (2014). The contested ontology of affordances: Implications for researching technological affordances for collaborative knowledge production. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 360-368. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Reed, E. S. (1996). Encountering the world. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Robinson, L., Cotten, S., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., . . . Stern, M. J. (2015). Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 569-582. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Scarantino, A. (2003). Affordances explained. Philosophy of Science, 70, 949-961. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Schmidt, R. C. (2007). Scaffolds for social meaning. Ecological Psychology, 19, 137-151. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Schradie, J. (2012). The trend of class, race and ethnicity in social media inequality: Who still can’t afford to blog? Information, Communication & Society, 15, 555-571. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Smith, A. (2014). Older adults and technology use (Pew Internet and American Life Project). Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/ Google Scholar | |
|
Stoffregen, T. A. (2003). Affordances as properties of the animal-environment system. Ecological Psychology, 15, 115-134. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Torenvliet, G. (2003). We can’t afford it! The devaluation of a usability term. Interaction, 10, 12-17. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Treem, J. W., Leonardi, P. M. (2012). Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Communication Yearbook, 36, 143-189. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2129853 Google Scholar | |
|
Turvey, M. T. (1992). Affordances and prospective control: An outline of the ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4, 173-187. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Wansink, B., van Ittersum, K., Painter, J. E. (2006). Ice cream illusions: Bowls, spoons, and self-served portion sizes. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 145, 240-243. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Warren, W. H. (1984). Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 683-703. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109, 121-136. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Wright, S., Parchoma, G. (2011). Technologies for learning? An actor-network theory critique of “affordances” in research on mobile learning. Research in Learning Technology, 19, 247-258. Google Scholar | Crossref |
