Originally, an affordance came from the Gibson’s ecological psychology that offered the status for acting in naturally physical environment which provided us with an opportunity to achieve end. Then, Norman placed it in design and made supreme stun in the field of HCI[1].
The effect of physical objects in embodied interaction is immense. But what’s the embodiment in system design? As Djajadiningrat and Wensveen put it:
“Many interfaces of electronic products feel ‘stuck on’. This is not only a matter of form interaction, but also a matter of how ‘display and push button’ interfaces disrupt interaction flow, causing many electronic products to feel computeresque[2: p.294].”
It is obvious that we don’t need take much of time to interpret icons and text within the cognition. One of its first procedures is to sense the material things that they can do for you and then give it a try. If the function could be used, we will get out the meaning of it. However, it’s very important for user to balance what they consequently confront. when they said:
“In this approach neither action nor appearance is arbitrary: they need to be designed concurrently with function in order to craft a meaningful relationship between appearance, action and function[2: p.295].”
It seems clear that affordance is the direct perception and sensory[2]! No meaning be there, it may just be created in interaction without much more complex and complete representation required somebody to learn and remember. Another, focusing on actions is also a help to couple between appearance and function.
Reference:
[1] Gibson, J.J.(1986) The ecological Approach to visual Perceptual. Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
[2] Djajadininingrat JP, Wensveen SAG, Frens JW, Overbeeke CJ (2004) Tangible Products: Redressing the Balance Between Appearance and Action. Spec Issue Tangible Interaction JPers Ubiquitous Comput 8:294-309
No comments:
Post a Comment