1 / 10

Interacting with Technologies Appropriation of Affordances

Interacting with Technologies Appropriation of Affordances. Course Portal: http://www.itu.dk/~rkva/2011-Spring-EB22 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=133258548012 Etherpad : http://ietherpad.com/7y3drhMCnq Thursday, 10-Mar-2011 EB22: Online Marketing: Lecture 18

primo
Download Presentation

Interacting with Technologies Appropriation of Affordances

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interactingwith Technologies Appropriation of Affordances • Course Portal: http://www.itu.dk/~rkva/2011-Spring-EB22 • Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=133258548012 • Etherpad: http://ietherpad.com/7y3drhMCnq • Thursday, 10-Mar-2011 • EB22: Online Marketing: Lecture 18 • Auditorium 4, ITU, Copenhagen, Denmark

  2. Affordances AffordancesareAction-TakingPossibilitiesand Meaning-MakingOpportunitiesin an actor-environment system relative to actorcompetenciesand system capabilities

  3. Affordances Action-Taking Possibilities & Meaning-Making Opportunities Alva Noë: Action in Perception Enactive view argues for the tight coupling between ecological information and sensorimotor knowledge Two -Systems Hypothesis (Bridgeman, 2000) Functionally Separate Visual Systems Visual (Meaning-Making) Visual Guidance of Behavior (Action-Taking)

  4. Affordances Cognitive Psychology Subjectivity of Meaning: Interpretation Internal Representations & External Representations Minded Meaning: Symbolic/ Semantic Mind : Brain :: Software : Hardware (Block, 1995) “Copying in the world” (Dr.ArindamChakrabarti, personal conversation) Ecological Psychology Relationality of Meaning: “Direct Perception” of “Circumambient Arrays” (Gibson, 1979) Affordanes: Action-Taking Possibilities and Meaning-Making Opportunities Embodied Meaning: Informational/Phenomenal Mind : Brain :: Action : Perception “Coping with the world” (Dr.ArindamChakrabarti, personal conversation) Problem Logical Gap between Interpretive and Informational Theories of Meaning Solution Bridge the gap by making Meaning Ecologically Cognitive

  5. Affordances Ontological Foundations of the Notion of Affordance (Turvey, 1992) Materialist Dynamicist Property Realist “An affordance cuts across the dichotomy of subjective–objective and helps us to understand its inadequacy. It is equally a fact of the environment and a fact of behavior. It is both physical and psychical, yet neither. An affordance points both ways, to the environment and to the observer” (J. J. Gibson, 1979, p. 129).

  6. Appropriation of affordances (AoA) After Rogoff and Lave (1984): “cognition is something one uses, not something one has” Cognition as appropriation of affordances (adapted from Reed, 1991)

  7. Definition of Socio-Technical affordance Let W = (T, S, O) be a socio-technical system (e.g., person-collaborating-with-another-person system) constituted by Technology T (e.g., collaboration software), Self-actor S, (e.g., artifact creator), and Other-actor O (e.g., artifact editor). Let p be a property of T; q be a property of S and r be a property of O. Let β be a relation between p, q and r, p/q/r. β defines a higher order property (i.e., a property of the socio-technical system). Then β is said to be a socio-technical affordance with respect to W if and only if:: W = (T ,S, O) possesses β Neither T ,S, O, (T, S), (T,O), (S,O) possesses β

  8. So what?Implications for Online Marketing Participants mightchoose to appropriateaffordancesthatarecontext-specific, situation-relative and culture-sensitive Design ads for not onlyaction-takingpossibilities (transactional) but also for meaning-makingopportunities (brand awareness, brand association) Note thatappropriation is relative to actorcompetencies and system capabilities Design Tradeoffs Provide ATP and MMO (example of social sharing options onwebpages)

  9. References Block, N. (1995). The Mind as the Software of the Brain. An Invitation to Cognitive Science, 3, 377–425. Bridgeman, B., Gemmer, A., Forsman, T., & Huemer, V. (2000). Processing spatial information in the sensorimotor branch of the visual system. Vision Research, 40(25), 3539-3552. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Noë, A. (2004). Action In Perception: Bradford Book. Stoffregen, T. A. (2003). Affordances as Properties of the Animal-Environment System. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 115-134. Turvey, M. T. (1992). Affordances and Prospective Control: An Outline of the Ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4(3), 173-187. Vatrapu, R. (2007). Technological Intersubjectivity and Appropriation of Affordances in Computer Supported Collaboration. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu: Available at http://lilt.ics.hawaii.edu/~vatrapu/docs/Vatrapu-Dissertation.pdf.

  10. Discussion

More Related