Human-Computer Interaction

INTERACT 2015: Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2015 pp 185-202 | Cite as

The Affordances of Broken Affordances

  • Martin Gielsgaard Grünbaum
  • Jakob Grue Simonsen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9298)

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.

Keywords

Affordances Technology affordances Mediated action Breakdown Design 

References

  1. 1.
    Albrechtsen, H., Andersen, H.H.K., Bødker, S., Pejtersen, A.M.: Affordances in activity theory and cognitive systems engineering. Technical report Risø-R-1287(EN), Risø National Laboratory (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bærentsen, K.B., Trettvik, J.: An activity theory approach to affordance. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI 2002, pp. 51–60 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beaudouin-Lafon, M.: Instrumental interaction: an interaction model for designing post-wimp user interfaces. In: Proceedings of CHI 2000, pp. 446–453 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bødker, S., Andersen, P.B.: Complex mediation. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 20(4), 353–402 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chemero, A.: An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecol. Psychol. 15(2), 181–195 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Souza, C.S., Prates, R.O., Carey, T.: Missing and declining affordances: are these appropriate concepts? J. Braz. Comput. Soc. 7(1), 26–34 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gaver, W.W.: Technology affordances. In: Proceedings of CHI 1991, pp. 79–84 (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaver, W.W.: The affordances of media spaces for collaboration. In: Proceedings of CSCW 1992, pp. 17–24 (1992)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gibson, J.: The concept of affordances. In: Shaw, R., Bransford, J. (eds.) Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing, pp. 67–82. Wiley, Hoboken (1977)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gibson, J.J.: The Ecological Approach To Visual Perception. Psychology Press, New York (1986)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gulotta, R., Odom, W., Forlizzi, J., Faste, H.: Digital artifacts as legacy: exploring the lifespan and value of digital data. In: Proceedings of CHI 2013, pp. 1813–1822 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartson, H.R.: Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional affordances in interaction design. Behav. IT 22(5), 315–338 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang, E.M., Truong, K.N.: Breaking the disposable technology paradigm: opportunities for sustainable interaction design for mobile phones. In: Proceedings of CHI 2008, pp. 323–332 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ihara, M., Kobayashi, M., Sakai, Y.: Human affordance. Int. J. Web Based Communities 5(2), 255–272 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ikemiya, M., Rosner, D.K.: Broken probes: toward the design of worn media. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 18(3), 671–683 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jackson, S.J., Kang, L.: Breakdown, obsolescence and reuse: HCI and the art of repair. In: Proceedings of CHI 2014, pp. 449–458 (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kang, L., Park, T., Jackson, S.J.: Scale: human interactions with broken and discarded technologies. In: Proceedings of CHI 2014, pp. 399–402 (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaptelinin, V., Nardi, B.: Affordances in HCI: toward a mediated action perspective. In: Proceedings of CHI 2012, pp. 967–976 (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kirk, D.S., Sellen, A.: On human remains: values and practice in the home archiving of cherished objects. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 17(3), 10:1–10:43 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McGrenere, J., Ho, W.: Affordances: clarifying and evolving a concept. In: Graphics Interface 2000, pp. 179–186 (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Norman, D.A.: The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Norman, D.A.: Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions 6(3), 38–43 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Norman, D.A.: The way I see it: signifiers, not affordances. Interactions 15(6), 18–19 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Odom, W., Pierce, J., Stolterman, E., Blevis, E.: Understanding why we preserve some things and discard others in the context of interaction design. In: Proceedings of CHI 2009, pp. 1053–1062 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Oshlyansky, L., Thimbleby, H., Cairns, P.: Breaking affordance: culture as context. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI 2004, pp. 81–84 (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Şahin, E., et al.: To afford or not to afford: a new formalization of affordances toward affordance-based robot control. Adapt. Behav. 15(4), 447–472 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schaub, F., Seifert, J., Honold, F., Müller, M., Rukzio, E., Weber, M.: Broken display = broken interface: the impact of display damage on smartphone interaction. In: Proceedings of CHI 2014, pp. 2337–2346 (2014)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Still, J.D., Dark, V.J.: Cognitively describing and designing affordances. Des. Stud. 34(3), 285–301 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stoffregen, T.A.: Affordances as properties of the animal-environment system. Ecol. Psychol. 15(2), 115–134 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Torenvliet, G.: We can’t afford it!: the devaluation of a usability term. Interactions 10(4), 12–17 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner, P.: Affordance as context. Interact. Comput. 17(6), 787–800 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Turvey, M.T.: Affordances and prospective control: An outline of the ontology. Ecol. Psychol. 4(3), 173–187 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vermeulen, J., Luyten, K., van den Hoven, E., Coninx, K.: Crossing the bridge over norman’s gulf of execution: revealing feedforward’s true identity. In: Proceedings of CHI 2013, pp. 1931–1940 (2013)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vicente, K.J., Rasmussen, J.: Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 22(4), 589–606 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vygotsky, L.S.: Mind and Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1978)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Gielsgaard Grünbaum
    • 1
  • Jakob Grue Simonsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Copenhagen (DIKU)Copenhagen SDenmark

Personalised recommendations