Affordance

I have to be honest that I had a very hard time understanding and visualizing the theory that was behind of Gibson and Normam’s affordance. But I will try my best to tell you what I got out of it.

Gibson’s theory was involving the transition between perceptions of the environment to some sort of action that follows the perception. Meaning when I see a pen, I will think that needs to do something with writing as an action.

The visual or graphic elements can make us understand about how they function, not only as 2D object but thinking the 3d action. Which can be very helpful when object interacts with humans and visualization of an object and more.

Norman’s affordance was little different from Gibsons.
It was thinking or perceiving something that perhaps does not actually or physically exist but still produce clues to tell the user to how to use the objects.

Personally it’s hard for me to understand these concepts without seeing examples of how it uses them in our everyday life. Any thoughts?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: