Abstract
This article takes a renewed look at the concept of “affordance.” It points out that the concept is being used within the CSCL community in ways which signify an underlying disagreement concerning the exact ontological nature and epistemological status of an “affordance.” Such disagreement, it is argued, is a problem for both design and empirical research. Because HCI discussions of the concept have informed CSCL, views presented within this discourse are discussed. A Merleau-Pontian account of affordances is developed, building on his view of the human being as always already being-in-the world in a non-thematized, pre-reflective correspondence of body and world in the concrete activity. A dynamic, agent-centred, cultural-, experience- and skill-relative, but perception-independent, ontology is proposed for affordances. Toward the end of the article, examples are given of how the Merleau-Pontian account of affordances may shift the focus of empirical research and of design processes within CSCL.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For the distinction between macro- and micro-scripts cf. Dillenbourg and Tchounikine (2007). Macro-scripts denote “coarse-grained scripts” aimed at creating learning situations in which interactions between learners can take place. Micro-scripts, conversely, refer to “finer-grained scripts” which scaffold the interaction process itself by, for example, prompting specific conversational turns.
The empirical claims presented for illustrative purposes in this paragraph draw on experiences from 7 years of computer-supported distance teaching and learning, on personal communication with the students and teachers involved herein, and on personal communication with representatives of two global companies, in which a large fraction of meetings and training activities are conducted on a synchronous audiovisual platform.
References
Bærentsen, K., & Trettvik, J. (2002). An activity theory approach to affordance. Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (Aarhus, October 2002) ACM, 51–60.
Clancey, W. (1997). Situated cognition. On human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Copeland, J. (1993). Artificial intelligence. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of computer assisted learning, 23(1), 1–13.
Dohn, N. B. (2006). Affordances—a Merleau-Pontian account. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Networked Learning 2006 (Lancaster, April 2006), 1–8.
Dreyfus, H. (1992). What computers still can't do. New York: Harper & Row.
Dreyfus, H. (2001). Phenomenological description versus rational reconstruction. Revue internationale de philosophie, 55(216), 181–196.
Dreyfus, H., & Dreyfus, S. (1986). Mind over machine. New York: The Free.
Dwyer, N., & Suthers, D. (2006). Consistent practices in artefact-mediated collaboration. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(4), 481–511.
Gallagher, S. (1986). Body image and body schema. A conceptual clarification. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 7(4), 541–554.
Gallagher, S. (1995). Body schema and intentionality. In J. Bermudez, A. Marcel & N. Eilan (Eds.), The body and the self, pp. 225–244. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Gallagher, S. (2005). How the body shapes the mind. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
Gaver, W. (1991). Technology affordances CHI’91 Conference Proceedings (New Orleans, Louisiana, April–May 1991), ACM, 79–84.
Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Heidegger, M. (1986). Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Jones, C., Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., & Lindström, B. (2006). A relational, indirect, meso-level approach to CSCL design in the next decade. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 35–56.
Kaptelinin, V. (1996). Computer-mediated activity: Functional organs in social and developmental contexts. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness, pp. 45–68. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Kaptelinin, V., & Hedestig, U. (2009). (in press). Breakdowns, affordances and indirect design: A study of videoconference learning environment in undergraduate education. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, C. Jones, & B. Lindström (Eds.), Analysing networked learning practices in higher education and continuing professional development. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Kirschner, P. A., Martens, R. L., & Strijbos, J. W. (2004). CSCL in higher education? A framework for designing multiple collaborative environments. In J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner & R. L. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education, pp. 3–30. Boston: Kluwer.
Leder, D. (1990). The absent body. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McGrenere, J., & Ho, W. (2000). Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000 (Montreal, May 2000), A K Peters, 179–186.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge and Kegan.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1968). The visible and the invisible. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Norman, D. (1989). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
Norman, D. (1999). Affordance, conventions and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38–43.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. New York: Doubleday & Co.
Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
Sanders, J. (1993). Merleau-Ponty, Gibson, and the materiality of meaning. Man and World, 26, 287–302.
Suthers, D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning-making: a research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315–337.
Tchounikine, P. (2008). Operationalizing macro-scripts in CSCL technological settings. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 193–233.
Warren, W. H., Jr. (1995). Constructing an econiche. In J. Flach, P. Hancock & J. Caird (Eds.), Global perspectives on the ecology of human-machines systems, pp. 210–237. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.
Wittgenstein, L. (1984). Philosophische Untersuchungen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank four anonymous reviewers and G. Stahl for helpful comments and reflections which helped me strengthen the article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bonderup Dohn, N. Affordances revisited: Articulating a Merleau-Pontian view. Computer Supported Learning 4, 151–170 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9062-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9062-z