This link has been bookmarked by 59 people . It was first bookmarked on 26 Mar 2008, by Cherice Montgomery.
-
30 May 18
-
02 Jul 17
-
01 Nov 16
-
05 Sep 16
-
What the designer cares about is whether the user
perceives that some action is possible (or in the case of perceived non-affordances, not possible). -
conventions, or what I called logical and cultural "constraints
-
All this is cultural convention, not affordances.
-
how does one learn the model in the first place? -- why by conventions, words, and metaphors.
-
-
05 Aug 16
-
29 Jun 16
-
11 Nov 15
-
In product design, where one deals with real, physical objects, there can be both real and perceived affordances, and the two need not be the same
-
-
23 Jun 15
-
21 Jun 15
-
Affordances and Design
-
What the designer cares about is whether the user
perceives that some action is possible (or in the case of perceived non-affordances, not possible). -
- If the desired controls can be perceived
1.a. In an easy to use design, if they can both readily be perceived and interpreted - If the desired actions can be discovered
2.a. Whether standard conventions are obeyed
In the world of design, what matters is:
- If the desired controls can be perceived
-
How new users understand what to do: Four principles for screen interfaces
-
1. Follow conventional usage, both in the choice of images and the allowable interactions.
-
2. Use words to describe the desired action (e.g., "click here" or use labels in front of perceived objects).
-
4. Follow a coherent conceptual model so that once part of the interface is learned, the same principles apply to other parts.
-
how does one learn the
model in the first place? -- why by conventions, words, and metaphors.
-
-
28 May 15
-
13 Jan 15
-
11 May 14
Essay by Don Norman about affordances. 2004 (?)
design affordance perception interaction usability Don Norman
-
19 Apr 14
-
What the designer cares about is whether the user
perceives that some action is possible (or in the case of perceived non-affordances, not possible). -
because I can click anytime I want, it is wrong to argue whether a graphical object on the screen "affords clicking." It does. The real
question is about the perceived affordance: Does the user perceive that clicking on that location is a meaningful, useful action to perform? -
all this is a cultural, learned convention. The choice of action is
arbitrary: there is nothing inherent in the devices or design that requires the system to act in this way. (The word "arbitrary" does not mean that
any random depiction would do equally well: the current choice is an intelligent fit to human cognition, but this is a different topic, for another day.)
-
-
13 Mar 14
-
Cultural constraints are learned conventions that are shared by a cultural group. The fact that the graphic on the right hand side of a display is a
"scroll bar" and that one should move the cursor to it, hold down a mouse button, and "drag" it downward in order to see objects located below the
current visible set (thus causing the image itself to appear to move upwards) -- all this is a cultural, learned convention. The choice of action is
arbitrary: there is nothing inherent in the devices or design that requires the system to act in this way. (The word "arbitrary" does not mean that
any random depiction would do equally well: the current choice is an intelligent fit to human cognition, but this is a different topic, for another day.)
-
-
11 Feb 14
-
21 Jan 14
-
for in design, we care much more about what the user perceives than what is actually true.
-
In graphical, screen-based interfaces, all that the designer has available is control over perceived affordances.
-
-
19 Jan 14
-
"affordance" has taken on a life far beyond the original meanin
-
"affordance" was originally invented by the perceptual psychologist J. J. Gibson (1977, 1979) to refer to the actionable properties between
the world and an actor (a person or animal). To Gibson, affordances are a relationship -
The
concept has caught on, but not always with true understanding. Part of the blame lies with me: I should have used the term "perceived affordance," -
What the designer cares about is whether the user
perceives that some action is possible (or in the case of perceived non-affordances, not possible) -
In graphical, screen-based interfaces, all that the designer has available is control over perceived affordances
-
Most of this affordance is of no value. Thus, if the display does not have a touch-sensitive screen, the
screen still affords touching, but it has no result on the computer system -
The real
question is about the perceived affordance: Does the user perceive that clicking on that location is a meaningful, useful action to perform? -
In graphical design, one is really talking about conventions, or what I called logical and cultural "constraints" in POET
-
Thus, it is not possible to move the cursor outside the screen: this is a physical constraint. Logical constraints
use reasoning to determine the alternatives -
Cultural constraints are learned conventions that are shared by a cultural group. The fact that the graphic on the right hand side of a display is a
"scroll bar" and that one should move the cursor to it, hold down a mouse button, and "drag" it downward in order to see objects located below the
current visible set (thus causing the image itself to appear to move upwards) -- all this is a cultural, learned convention -
The choice of action is
arbitrary: there is nothing inherent in the devices or design that requires the system to act in this way. -
All this is cultural convention, not affordance
-
Follow conventional usage,
-
Those who violate conventions, even when they are convinced that their new method is superior, are doomed to fail. (You cannot
successfully introduce a non-qwerty keyboard today -
Use words to describe the desired action
-
action is described verbally
-
-
07 Nov 13
-
to refer to the actionable properties between
the world and an actor (a person or animal) -
affordances are a relationship
-
they do not have to be visible,
known, or desirable -
we care much more about what the user perceives than what is actually true.
-
What the designer cares about is whether the user
-
perceives that some action is possible
-
where one deals with real, physical objects, there can be both real and perceived affordances, and the two need not be the same
-
In graphical,
-
perceived affordances.
-
it is useful in multiple-person
communication, and it helps aid the sale of screen-cleaning tissues and fluids. -
it is wrong to argue whether a graphical object on the screen "affords clicking.
-
Does the user perceive that clicking on that location is a meaningful, useful action to perform?
-
-
29 Jul 13
-
26 Jun 13
-
10 May 13
-
24 May 12
-
To Gibson, affordances are a relationship
-
-
23 Apr 12
woo you mi노먼이 자신이 사용한 '어포던스'가 '지각된 어포던스(perceived affordance)'라는 의미였다고 설명한 에세이. 앞서 소개한 책에서는 단순히 '어포던스'라고 썼던 게 실수(fault)였다고 고백. http://t.co/tQRqKVO9
-
19 Apr 12
-
09 Nov 10
-
25 Oct 10
Jess McMullinThought for the day: service evidence = affordances (not cues, as affordance often mistaken for) See http://bit.ly/a8YRke #servicedesign
-
27 May 10
-
22 Jan 10
-
28 Jan 09
-
15 Dec 08
-
05 Oct 08
-
05 Jul 08
-
28 Jun 08
-
refer to the actionable properties between
the world and an actor (a person or animal).
-
-
02 Jun 08
Travis Stiles"perceived affordance,"
for in design, we care much more about what the user perceives than what is actually true. What the designer cares about is whether the user
perceives that some action is possible -
13 Apr 08
-
03 Apr 08
-
26 Mar 08
-
05 Nov 07
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.