Comments on: Got Ergopsychonomics? http://johnnyholland.org/2012/01/got-ergopsychonomics/ It's all about interaction Fri, 26 Apr 2013 13:38:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Vicky Teinaki http://johnnyholland.org/2012/01/got-ergopsychonomics/#comment-118394 Vicky Teinaki Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:28:49 +0000 http://johnnyholland.org/?p=15849#comment-118394 @Mark: *JJ Gibson* oops, I knew that, amended ;) I think the greatest problem with Norman's approach is that we now get people saying "what's its affordance?" which is wrong. I'm a bit rusty on all of my MP and Gibson though, but it's taked about in detail by Hubert Dreyfus etc and the gestalt psychologists. @Mark: *JJ Gibson* oops, I knew that, amended ;)
I think the greatest problem with Norman’s approach is that we now get people saying “what’s its affordance?” which is wrong. I’m a bit rusty on all of my MP and Gibson though, but it’s taked about in detail by Hubert Dreyfus etc and the gestalt psychologists.

]]> By: Mark Parnell http://johnnyholland.org/2012/01/got-ergopsychonomics/#comment-118393 Mark Parnell Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:11:01 +0000 http://johnnyholland.org/?p=15849#comment-118393 William Gibson? Surely James! Moreover, Gibson didn't (IIRC) call them perceived affordances; rather, his conception of affordances is that they were something that actually existed as a property of objects that existed independent of our ability to perceive them. As such, we can say that screen elements have Gibsonian affordances . Neither Gibson's nor Norman's concept of affordances is necessarily correct, so I don't felel the term was overextended in its use. Agree that Ergopsychonomics is a pretty awful term however, and has the putrid stink of marketing BS about it. William Gibson? Surely James! Moreover, Gibson didn’t (IIRC) call them perceived affordances; rather, his conception of affordances is that they were something that actually existed as a property of objects that existed independent of our ability to perceive them. As such, we can say that screen elements have Gibsonian affordances . Neither Gibson’s nor Norman’s concept of affordances is necessarily correct, so I don’t felel the term was overextended in its use.

Agree that Ergopsychonomics is a pretty awful term however, and has the putrid stink of marketing BS about it.

]]>