Affordances Questions

PART ONE

1.) Define "Affordance:" The qualities of an object with respect to a specific organism and how it perceives the potential use of this object ("what can i use this for and why?)

2.) An organism might evolve in response to the potential affordance of an object. For example, you might argue humans/great apes evolved fingers in order to grasp objects better; thus responding to the physical properties of objects such as sticks and rocks to be used as tools. The affordance of an object could be seen as a motivating force in evolution, better allowing an organism to "take advantage" of its environment.

3.) A habitat is a place in which an organism lives. A niche is a "set of affordances," or the many ways in which an organism could and can USE its environment, not just LIVE in it. My niche is the "modern world" and I am a "modern human," relying on affordances such as buttons on keyboards, the wheel in a car, the keys that open doors, and so and so on.

PART TWO

THREE AFFORDANCES IN THIS ROOM:

The KEYBOARD affords clicking the keys because the keys are easy to press down, but there is not reason it could not potentially be used as a plate, a blunt object for smashing, or the cord on it could be used to tie something up. The keyboard conditions a user to tap the keys because that is the only way in which it can interface the computer screen and create visual reinforcement. In other words, clicking the keys generates reinforcement and will cause a user to keep clicking the keys and not use the keyboard in any other ways. The keyboard does not offer USEFUL affordance of clicking the keys if the computer is OFF, so the way in which one interacts with a keyboard may become different if the computer never goes on.

The MOUSE, which affords dragging and clicking because it is used to interface the computer and fits nicely underneath a human hand, but there is not reason it could not potentially be used as a brush or applicator of some sorts, a flash light, or a nunchuck. The bottom of the mouse is FLAT, and the top is curved, so it makes a sort of logical sense to move it around on the ground with the flat side facing down. However, I can see an alien getting confused by how to use it to make the computer react.

The TABLE, which affords setting objects on top of it because it is a sturdy surface just at the level of the chairs in the room. But there is no reason you couldn't use the table for standing, or for living underneath, or sleeping on top of it, or turning it upside down and roosting on the legs (because thats what a chicken would do).

PART THREE

USEFULNESS describes whether  an object has potential affordances that can provide some kind of positive reinforcement or solve a problem, they offer kind of productive outcome for the user when used in a certain manner. UTILITY describes an affordance that has a specific use and is used for this purpose.

A false affordance can be a "placebo button." For example, in some cities the cross walk buttons are useless and don't actually turn on the crosswalk sign or affect traffic in any way. People feel like the button affords pressing, but it does not.

I don't we are or can be aware of all the affordances of an object. Affordances are clearly cultural and learned perceptions of the enviroment. Everyone will HAVE affordances no matter what culture they are from, but these affordances will always be different depending on that culture and the individual. For example, we know that a TV remote affords pressing buttons and pointing the object at the TV, but someone from a third world country who had never seen a remote and had little exposure to electronics would probably do something completely different with a remote, even if a TV was in the same environment as the remote and the person.

And yes, affordances would be different for the disabled because they have different physical limitations. For example, a person in a wheelchair might not perceive a tall table as a place to set things on, because they cannot reach it. And stairs would certainly offer different affordances to them as well.

Affordances relate very closely to intentionality of art. As artists, we want our art (esp. the interactive art) to afford a very specific reaction. Or, perhaps we don't; either way, artists seek both to control perceived affordances and challenge cultural affordances and change a person's perspective on the world.

Metaphor also relates closely to the idea of affordance. An affordance "represents" a potential use of an object, it seems concrete but it is actually very abstract just like metaphor. Metaphor's are different in different cultures, just like affordances. Just like a handle on a cup stands for "grab and hold," Ravens in western culture are a metaphor for death. But these are not facts and may not be true for another person or another culture. Thus, metaphor and affordance are just both abstract terms to describe different phenomenon.