Theory or Approach? Clarifying the Disciplinary Lineages of Affordances

• In Event: An Affordance Framework for Communication Research: Theoretical, Contextual, and Methodological Considerations

Abstract

Affordances, much like communication itself, developed out of shared concerns that span disciplines. Although much overlap exists, four traditions of affordances can be identified: ecological psychology and design; sociomateriality in organizational communication; agentic perspectives on technology use in sociology; and “technical affordances” in computer-mediated communication. James Gibson coined the term “affordance” to describe the interaction between subjective perception of utility and objective qualities of objects for particular species. This notion has been particularly influential in human-computer interaction (HCI). Organizational communication scholars coming from a sociomateriality perspective see affordances as illuminating how and why individuals integrate technology into organizational processes. Sociologists employ affordances as a way to negotiate structure and agency in what Giddens terms structuration. There is a dire need in communication and technology research to connect properties of technologies with mechanisms for particular outcomes. Realizing this goal requires considering which of the various disciplinary traditions we draw on and synthesize. These disciplinary traditions have alternately focused on perception of technologies, their objective qualities, and how they are integrated into everyday routines. Together, I argue these traditions suggest at least two related perspectives on affordances in communication: a “theory” form focused on connecting perception of utility to routines, and a sociomaterial “approach” interested in the relationship of mechanisms to outcomes.

Author

• Andrew Schrock, U of Southern California - Annenberg School for Communication