Affordance

Affordance in everyday language can be defined as “the quality or property of an object that defines its possible uses or makes clear how it can or should be used” (Merriam Webster n.d.). The handle of a mug is for instance an affordance that allows you to hold it, and the hollowed-out shape allows you to pour liquid into it and drink from it without spilling. Affordances shape the way we use an object and consequently our behaviour, but it is not a given that the actual use will follow the intended use. Usage can also be disruptive. A cup, for example, can be used as a weapon if it is thrown, with the handle acting as a throwing mechanism. 

The term was first coined by psychologist James Gibson (1979/2015) to describe the correlation between an animal and its environment, focusing on what a particular environment provides to animals. Gibson highlighted that affordances are both functional, enabling, and constraining actions, and relational in the sense that they may differ depending on the biological species, amount of knowledge, and context. A chair may afford sitting for a human, but for a fly it affords a very different use (Arminen, et al. 2016).  

Since Gibson, the concept of affordance has been applied in many other theoretical fields, including sociology and media studies. Here it is most often used as a way to understand the relationship and interaction between technological artefacts and human practices.  

Technological affordances  

Hutchby (2001) was one of the first theorists to apply the concept of affordances to technology as a way to understand how technology shapes social interaction.  

Instead of emphasising only human agency and the ability of humans to shape technology or technology and its ability to shape human behaviour, the concept of affordances allows for a focus on the interaction between object and actor and on both the constraining and enabling aspects of the technologies. According to Hutchby (2001), affordances frame, but do not determine, the possibilities for agentic action in relation to an object. The affordances do not force humans to act in a specific way with, around, or via the object, but they do set limits on what is possible to do. There is a variety of ways in which one can respond to the range of affordances for action and interaction that the technology presents.  

Meredith (2019) has applied the concept specifically to the study of online interactions, and she stresses the non-static nature of affordances. Similarly to Huchby, Meredith finds that affordances may have an impact on how a user interacts with a specific technology, but social norms and expectations also influences the interaction. The scholar argues that the existence of an affordance depends entirely upon the relationship between the actor and the object. It is only through interaction that it becomes evident which affordances are actually relevant and how they are used. 

In short, the concept of affordances can be used to analyse the possible uses and constraints of an object or technology. A particular object or technology call for a certain form of interaction and use and at the same time places limitations on that use. For example, the affordances of the classic telephone allow for interpersonal communication across distances, but the communication is limited solely to speech (Chandler & Munday 2020). The smartphone has other affordances and among other things allows for interpersonal communication across distances with both voice and video with moving images, but here the video is limited to fit the screen size of the smartphone and the communication requires internet access. The way we interact with a classic phone and a smartphone will therefore be different because their affordances enable and restrict different uses. 

References

Arminen, I., Licoppe, C., & Spagnolli, A. (2016). Respecifying mediated interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(4), pp. 290-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1234614  

Chandler, D. & Munday, R. (2020). Affordances (affordances and constraints). A Dictionary of Media and Communication (3 ed.). Oxford University Press. 

Gibson, J.J. (2014). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition (1st ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315740218   

Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), pp. 441-456. https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000219  

Meredith, J. (2019). Conversation analysis and online interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), pp. 241-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631040  

Merriam-Webster (n.d.). Affordance. Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved November 12, 2024, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/affordance.