The Experts below are selected from a list of 99 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Azadeh Savoli - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ICIS - Functional Affordance Archetypes: a New Perspective for Examining the Impact of IT Use on Desirable Outcomes
2013Co-Authors: Azadeh Savoli, Henri BarkiAbstract:IT usage is generally viewed as a key indicator of adoption success and a prerequisite for deriving benefits. Yet, while IT usage can provide a good measure of adoption success, it does not necessarily yield desirable outcomes, i.e., the individual benefits expected by its designers. This paper investigates how IT use leads to its desirable outcomes based on a Functional Affordance (FA) perspective (Markus and Silver 2008). Specifically, we define perceived Functional Affordances (PFA) as an IT’s afforded possibilities for action as perceived by an individual user. Further, by following Eisenhardt’s (1989) approach of theory building from multiple cases, we develop a PFA typology and introduce four PFA archetypes: i.e. Facilitator, Guardian Angel, Imposer, and Inhibitor. Subsequently, we intend to use these archetypes to explain under what conditions the PFA of an e-health system can be transformed into usage that is conducive to the attainment of its desirable outcomes.
-
Functional Affordance archetypes a new perspective for examining the impact of it use on desirable outcomes
International Conference on Information Systems, 2013Co-Authors: Azadeh Savoli, Henri BarkiAbstract:IT usage is generally viewed as a key indicator of adoption success and a prerequisite for deriving benefits. Yet, while IT usage can provide a good measure of adoption success, it does not necessarily yield desirable outcomes, i.e., the individual benefits expected by its designers. This paper investigates how IT use leads to its desirable outcomes based on a Functional Affordance (FA) perspective (Markus and Silver 2008). Specifically, we define perceived Functional Affordances (PFA) as an IT’s afforded possibilities for action as perceived by an individual user. Further, by following Eisenhardt’s (1989) approach of theory building from multiple cases, we develop a PFA typology and introduce four PFA archetypes: i.e. Facilitator, Guardian Angel, Imposer, and Inhibitor. Subsequently, we intend to use these archetypes to explain under what conditions the PFA of an e-health system can be transformed into usage that is conducive to the attainment of its desirable outcomes.
-
Functional Affordance Archetypes: a New Perspective for Examining the Impact of IT Use on Desirable Outcomes Research-in-Progress
2013Co-Authors: Azadeh SavoliAbstract:IT usage is generally viewed as a key indicator of adoption success and a prerequisite for deriving benefits. Yet, while IT usage can provide a good measure of adoption success, it does not necessarily yield desirable outcomes, i.e., the individual benefits expected by its designers. This paper investigates how IT use leads to its desirable outcomes based on a Functional Affordance (FA) perspective (Markus and Silver 2008). Specifically, we define perceived Functional Affordances (PFA) as an IT’s afforded possibilities for action as perceived by an individual user. Further, by following Eisenhardt’s (1989) approach of theory building from multiple cases, we develop a PFA typology and introduce four PFA archetypes: i.e. Facilitator, Guardian Angel, Imposer, and Inhibitor. Subsequently, we intend to use these archetypes to explain under what conditions the PFA of an e-health system can be transformed into usage that is conducive to the attainment of its desirable outcomes.
Rex H. Hartson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Cognitive, physical, sensory, and Functional Affordances in interaction design
2014Co-Authors: Rex H. HartsonAbstract:…they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand Mark 4.12 (NRSV) In reaction to Norman’s [1999] essay on misuse of the term Affordance in human-computer interaction literature, this article is a concept paper affirming the importance of this powerful concept, reinforcing Norman’s distinctions of terminology, and expanding on the usefulness of the concepts in terms of their application to interaction design and evaluation. We define and use four complementary types of Affordance in the context of interaction design and evaluation: cognitive Affordance, physical Affordance, sensory Affordance, and Functional Affordance. The terms cognitive Affordance (Norman’s perceived Affordance) and physical Affordance (Norman’s real Affordance) refer to parallel and equally important usability concepts for interaction design, to which sensory Affordance plays a supporting role. We argue that the concept of physical Affordance carries a mandatory component of utility or purposeful action (Functional Affordance). Finally, we provide guidelines to help designers think about how these four kinds of Affordance work together naturally in contextualized HCI design or evaluation
-
Cognitive, physical, sensory, and Functional Affordances in interaction design
2003Co-Authors: Rex H. HartsonAbstract:Abstract. In reaction to Norman’s (1999) essay on misuse of the term Affordance in human-computer interaction literature, this article is a concept paper affirming the importance of this powerful concept, reinforcing Norman’s distinctions of terminology, and expanding on the usefulness of the concepts in terms of their application to interaction design and evaluation. We define and use four complementary types of Affordance in the context of interaction design and evaluation: cognitive Affordance, physical Affordance, sensory Affordance, and Functional Affordance. The terms cognitive Affordance (Norman’s perceived Affordance) and physical Affordance (Norman’s real Affordance) refer to parallel and equally important usability concepts for interaction design, to which sensory Affordance plays a supporting role. We argue that the concept of physical Affordance carries a mandatory component of utility or purposeful action (Functional Affordance). Finally, we provide guidelines to help designers think about how these four kinds of Affordance work together naturally in contextualized HCI design or evaluation. 1
Henri Barki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ICIS - Functional Affordance Archetypes: a New Perspective for Examining the Impact of IT Use on Desirable Outcomes
2013Co-Authors: Azadeh Savoli, Henri BarkiAbstract:IT usage is generally viewed as a key indicator of adoption success and a prerequisite for deriving benefits. Yet, while IT usage can provide a good measure of adoption success, it does not necessarily yield desirable outcomes, i.e., the individual benefits expected by its designers. This paper investigates how IT use leads to its desirable outcomes based on a Functional Affordance (FA) perspective (Markus and Silver 2008). Specifically, we define perceived Functional Affordances (PFA) as an IT’s afforded possibilities for action as perceived by an individual user. Further, by following Eisenhardt’s (1989) approach of theory building from multiple cases, we develop a PFA typology and introduce four PFA archetypes: i.e. Facilitator, Guardian Angel, Imposer, and Inhibitor. Subsequently, we intend to use these archetypes to explain under what conditions the PFA of an e-health system can be transformed into usage that is conducive to the attainment of its desirable outcomes.
-
Functional Affordance archetypes a new perspective for examining the impact of it use on desirable outcomes
International Conference on Information Systems, 2013Co-Authors: Azadeh Savoli, Henri BarkiAbstract:IT usage is generally viewed as a key indicator of adoption success and a prerequisite for deriving benefits. Yet, while IT usage can provide a good measure of adoption success, it does not necessarily yield desirable outcomes, i.e., the individual benefits expected by its designers. This paper investigates how IT use leads to its desirable outcomes based on a Functional Affordance (FA) perspective (Markus and Silver 2008). Specifically, we define perceived Functional Affordances (PFA) as an IT’s afforded possibilities for action as perceived by an individual user. Further, by following Eisenhardt’s (1989) approach of theory building from multiple cases, we develop a PFA typology and introduce four PFA archetypes: i.e. Facilitator, Guardian Angel, Imposer, and Inhibitor. Subsequently, we intend to use these archetypes to explain under what conditions the PFA of an e-health system can be transformed into usage that is conducive to the attainment of its desirable outcomes.
Jean-pierre Thibaut - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Role of the Structure of Parts and of the Overall Object Shape in Children's Generalization of Novel Object Names.
Cognitive Development, 2006Co-Authors: Sabine Gelaes, Jean-pierre ThibautAbstract:We investigated the role of the structure of stimuli and their Functional Affordance on novel name generalization. Three- and 5-year-old children and adults were shown a training object with two possible functions, each one associated with a different part. They were taught about the name and the function of the object. We compared the classifications obtained for transfer stimuli composed of one part of the training stimulus—Functional or not, perceptually transformed or not, or composed of all the original training parts. Even young children generalized the novel name to Functional one-part transfer objects and disregarded non-Functional or dysFunctional objects, although their generalizations were more constrained by perceptual similarity than that of the adults.
Cristina Iani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
(Uncorrected proofs. Do not cite without permission). Simon and Functional Affordance Effects
2015Co-Authors: Antonello Pellicano, Anna M. Borghi, Cristina Iani, Ro RubichiAbstract:Simon-like and Functional Affordance effects with tools: The effects of object perceptual discrimination and object action stat
-
simon like and Functional Affordance effects with tools the effects of object perceptual discrimination and object action state
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2010Co-Authors: Antonello Pellicano, Anna M. Borghi, Sandro Rubichi, Cristina Iani, Roberto NicolettiAbstract:In the present study two separate stimulus–response compatibility effects (Functional Affordance and Simon-like effects) were investigated with centrally presented pictures of an object tool (a torch) characterized by a structural separation between the graspable portion and the goal-directed portion. In Experiment 1, participants were required to decide whether the torch was red or blue, while in Experiment 2 they were required to decide whether the torch was upright or inverted. Our results showed that with the same stimulus two types of compatibility effect emerged: one based on the direction signalled by the goal-directed portion of the tool (a Simon-like effect as observed in Experiment 1), and the other based on the actions associated with an object (a Functional Affordance effect as observed in Experiment 2). Both effects emerged independently of the person's intention to act on the stimulus, but depended on the stimulus properties that were processed in order to perform the task.
