Missing and declining affordances: are these appropriate concepts?

Souza, Clarisse Sieckenius de; Prates, Raquel Oliveira; Carey, Tom

doi:10.1590/s0104-65002000000200004

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather than the Ergonomic approach of matching the 'machine to the man', an alternate approach to designing for affordance has been adopted by De Souza and her colleagues who among have modelled the breakdowns in the communication between the user interface and the user (de Souza 1993;de Souza et al, 1999de Souza et al, , 2000Prates et al, 2000a,b). Their analysis uses 'tags'-which represent an utterance that expresses a user's reaction to what happens during interaction such as 'Where is?…”

Section: Breakdown Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Affordance as context

Turner

2005

Interacting with Computers

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of affordance is relatively easy to define, but has proved to be remarkably difficult to engineer. This paradox has sparked numerous debates as to its true nature. The discussion presented here begins with a review of the use of the term from which emerges evidence for a two-fold classification-simple affordance and complex affordance. Simple affordance corresponds to Gibson's original formulation, while complex affordances embody such things as history and practice. In trying to account for complex affordance, two contrasting, but complementary philosophical treatments are considered. The first of these is Ilyenkov's account of significances which he claims are 'ideal' phenomena. Ideal phenomena occupy are objective characteristics of things and are the product of human purposive activity. This makes them objective, but not independent (of any particular mind or perception) hence their similarity to affordances.The second perspective is Heidegger's phenomenological treatment of 'familiarity' and 'equipment'. As will be seen, Heidegger has argued that familiarity underpins our ability to cope in the world. A world, in turn, which itself comprises the totality of equipment. We cope by making use of equipment. Despite the different philosophical traditions both Ilyenkov and Heidegger have independently concluded that a thing is identified by its use and that use, in turn, is revealed by way of its affordances/significances. Finally, both authors-Heidegger directly and Ilyenkov indirectlyequate context and use, leading to the conclusion that affordance and context are one and the same. q

show abstract

Section: Breakdown Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Affordance as context

Turner

2005

Interacting with Computers

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The "Thanks, but no, thanks" tag points to situations in which users have declined designed affordances present in the system [51]. An important characteristic of this kind of breakdown is that they are partial failures because although users are usually able to see the design alternative and succeed with their goals using a secondary alternative or workaround, from the designer's perspective it represents a considerable amount of effort that has been wasted in designing features that turn out not being used.…”

Section: E "Thanks But No Thanks:" Partial Designers' Failures Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

Signs of Appropriation: A Semiotic Account of Breakdowns with IoT Technology

Chagas

Redmiles

Souza

2019

JIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging technology powered by smart devices that increasingly populate our environment and transform our practices. Understanding how technologies are appropriated is a key asset for designing them successfully. In this paper, we present findings from an in situ study where we observed how people use and adapt commercially available smart home technology, in real practice, and over time. By using semiotic theory and thematic analysis to investigate data from diaries, questionnaires and interviews collected from a group of eleven participants, we characterized IoT appropriation as interpretive states that can evolve overtime. We also identified eight classes of appropriation breakdowns and derived two semiotic qualities for IoT technologies. We propose that, together, they have the potential to support productive decision making by IoT designers, as well as to raise new research questions on the topic.

show abstract

“…Kirk and Sellen [19] and Odom et al [24], but consider mostly data (e.g., electronic diaries or photographs) rather than technological mediators such as programs, making for a very different set of affordances; in this vein of research, Gulotta et al mention the mostly untapped design space of using wear or decay on virtual objects [11], but from an aesthetic perspective rather than treating breakdown or obsolescence of affordances. De Souza, Prates and Carey [6] consider the actions of users missing affordances (essentially equivalent to users not perceiving affordances intended by designers, and equivalent to the defective signifiers treated later in this paper) and declining affordances (deliberately not acting on affordances intended by designers). Finally, Oshlyansky et al [25] investigate the effect of culture on perception of and interaction with affordances, but do not consider deliberate breakage.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Affordances of Broken Affordances

Grünbaum

Simonsen

2015

Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.We consider the use of physical and virtual objects having one or more affordances associated to simple interactions with them. Based on Kaptelinin and Nardi's notion of instrumental affordance, we investigate what it means to break an affordance, and the two ensuing questions we deem most important: how users may (i) achieve their goals in the presence of such broken affordances, and may (ii) repurpose or otherwise interact with artefacts with broken affordances. We argue that (A) thorough analyses of breakdowns of affordances and their associated signifiers and feedbacks have implication for design, particularly so for virtual artefacts, and that (B) there is a largely unexplored design space for designing, and redesigning objects with broken affordances, rather than broken or decayed objects.

show abstract

Missing and declining affordances: are these appropriate concepts?

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 19 publications

References 8 publications

Affordance as context

Affordance as context

Signs of Appropriation: A Semiotic Account of Breakdowns with IoT Technology

The Affordances of Broken Affordances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About