Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Affordance based design: a relational theory for design

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Research in Engineering Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

After reviewing current approaches to design theory, which are based on the transformative concept of function, we argue that this basis in function limits the scope of design problems and explanatory power of current design theories. As an alternative with greater potential for explanatory power and a framework for solving a wider array of design problems, we propose that a relational theory of design is needed. Such a relational theory should mirror those currently developed in mathematics, physics, computer science, and even philosophy. We develop a relational theory for design based on the concept of affordances from perceptual psychology. Affordances help to explain the entanglement between designers, users, and artifacts—relationships that are not currently handled by function based approaches to design. Affordance based design, as developed in this paper, does not offer a radical new approach to doing design, but rather a shift in design thinking. Our focus in this paper is therefore on the explanatory power and potential innovation fostered by this change in design thinking, as illustrated through several examples, and not on specific methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akiyama K (1991) Function analysis: systematic improvement of quality and performance. Productivity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertalanffy Lv (1969) General systems theory: foundations, developments, applications, rev edn. George Braziller, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham GP (2000) Events (like objects) are things, can have affordance properties, and can be perceived. Ecol Psychol 12(1):29–36. doi:10.1207/S15326969ECO1201_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush DJ (1989) Body icons and product semantics. In: Vihma S (ed) Semantic visions in design: Proceedings from the Symposium on Design Research and Semiotics. 17–18 May, 1989, University of Industrial Arts, Helsinki

  • Brown DC, Blessing L (2005) the relationship between function and affordance. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Longview, CA. Paper no. DETC2005-85017

  • Chandrasekaran B, Josephson JR (2000) Function in device representation. Eng Comput 16:162–177. doi:10.1007/s003660070003

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dennett DC, Haugeland J (1987) Intentionality. In: Gregory RL (ed) The Oxford companion to the mind. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon JR (1966) Engineering design: inventiveness, analysis, and decision making. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Flach JM, Hancock PA, Caird JK, Vicente K (eds) (1995) The ecology of human–machine systems. Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillsdale

  • Forrester JW (1968) Principles of systems. Pegasus Communications

  • Gaffney ES, Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2007) Roles of function and affordance in the evolution of artifacts. In: Proceedings of ICED’07, Paris, France. 27–30 August, 2007. Paper no. 592

  • Galvao AB (2007) Design relationships: integrating user information into product development. VDM Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Galvao AB, Sato K (2005) Affordances in product architecture: linking technical functions and user requirements. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Long Beach, CA. Paper no. DETC2005-84525

  • Galvao AB, Sato K (2006) Incorporating affordances into product architecture: methodology and case study. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Philadelphia, PA. Paper no. DETC2006-99404

  • Gaver WW (1991) Technology affordances. In: Proceedings of CHI’91. New Orleans, LA, 28 April–2 May, 1991. ACM, New York, pp 79–84

  • Gell-Mann M (1994) Complex adaptive systems. In: Cowan GA, Pines D, Meltzer D (eds) Complexity: metaphors, models, and reality. Addison-Wesley, New York, pp 17–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson JJ (1979) The theory of affordances. In: The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, Hopewell, pp 127–143

  • Gibson EJ (2000a) Perceptual learning in development: some basic concepts. Ecol Psychol 12(4):295–302. doi:10.1207/S15326969ECO1204_04

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson EJ (2000b) Where is the information for affordances? Ecol Psychol 12(1):53–56. doi:10.1207/S15326969ECO1201_5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gödel K (1931) Metamathematics. van Nostrand, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Guralnik DB (ed) (1984) Webster’s New World Dictionary. Warner Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartson HR (2003) Cognitive, sensory, and functional affordances in interaction design. Behav Inf Technol 22(5):315–338. doi:10.1080/01449290310001592587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazelrigg GA (1996) Systems engineering: an approach to information-based design. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Heft H (1989) Affordances and the body: an intentional analysis of Gibson’s ecological approach to visual perception. J Theor Soc Behav 19:1–30. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1989.tb00133.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirtz JM, Stone RB, McAdams DA, Szykman S, Wood K (2001) Evolving a functional basis for engineering design. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Pittsburgh, PA. Paper no. DETC2001/DTM-21688

  • Hirtz JM, Stone RB, McAdams DA, Szykman S, Wood K (2002) A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Res Eng Des 13:65–82. doi:10.1007/s00163-001-0008-3

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen T (2000) Function integration explained by allocation and activation of wirk elements. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Baltimore, MD. Paper no. DETC2000/DTM-14551

  • Kim YS, et al (2007) Affordances in interior design: a case study of affordances in interior design of conference room using enhanced function and task interaction. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Las Vegas, NV. Paper no. DETC2007-35864

  • Koffka K (1935) Principles of Gestalt psychology. Harcourt Brace, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Krampen M (1995) Semiotics in architecture and industrial/product design. In: Margolin V, Buchanan R (eds) The idea of design. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 89–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff K (1989) Product semantics: a triangulation and four design theories. In: Vakeva S (ed) Product Semantics ‘89: Proceedings from the Product Semantics ‘89 Conference. 16–19 May, 1989, University of Industrial Arts, Helsinki, pp a1–a23

  • Krippendorff K (1995) On the essential contexts of artifacts or on the proposition that ‘Design is Making Sense (of Things)’. In: Margolin V, Buchanan R (eds) The idea of design. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 156–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn TS (1996) The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Lintern G (2000) An affordance-based perspective on human–machine interface design. Ecol Psychol 12(1):65–69. doi:10.1207/S15326969ECO1201_7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier JRA (2005) Foundations of affordance based design. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2001) Affordance: the fundamental concept in engineering design. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Pittsburgh, PA. Paper no. DETC2001/DTM-21700

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2002) Comparing function and affordance as bases for design. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Montreal, Canada. Paper no. DETC2002/DTM-34029

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2003) Affordance-based methods for design. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Chicago, IL. Paper no. DETC2003/DTM-48673

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2005) A case study contrasting german systematic engineering design with affordance based design. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Long Beach, CA. Paper no. DETC2005-84954

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2006) Understanding the complexity of design. In: Braha D, Minai A, Bar-Yam Y (eds) Complex engineered systems: science meets technology. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM (2007) Identifying Affordances. Proceedings of ICED’07, Paris, France. August 27–30, 2007. Paper no. 591

  • Maier JRA, Ezhilan T, Fadel GM (2007) The affordance structure matrix—a concept exploration and attention directing tool for affordance based design. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Las Vegas, NV. Paper no. DETC2007-34526

  • Maier JRA, Fadel GM, Batisto D (2008) An affordance based approach to architectural theory, design, and practice. Des Stud (submitted)

  • Mark LS, Baillet JA, Craver KD, Douglas SD, Fox T (1990) What an actor must do in order to perceive the affordance for sitting. Ecol Psychol 2:325–366. doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0204_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGrenere J, Ho W (2000) Affordances: clarifying and evolving a concept. In: Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000. 13–17 May, 2000. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp 179–186

  • Murphy RR (1999) Case studies of applying Gibson’s ecological approach to Mobile robots. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 29(1):105–111. doi:10.1109/3468.736365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman DA (1988) The design of everyday things. Currency Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman DA (1999) Affordances, conventions and design. Interaction 6(3):38–43. ACM Press. doi:10.1145/301153.301168

    Google Scholar 

  • Otto K, Wood K (2001) Product design: techniques in reverse engineering and new product development. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudejans RRD, Michaels CF, Bakker FC, Dolne M (1996) The relevance of action in perceiving affordances: perception of catchableness of fly balls. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:879–891. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.22.4.879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl G, Beitz W, Feldhusen J, Grote KH (2007) Engineering design: a systematic approach, vol 3. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering J (2000) On the proper treatment of affordance: formality or mutuality. Ecol Psychol 12(1):71–77. doi:10.1207/S15326969ECO1201_8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittenger JB (1995) Some assembly required: biased speculations on the future of human factors design. In: Solso RL, Massaro DW (eds) The science of the mind: 2001 and beyond. Oxford, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Riccio GE, Stoffregen TA (1988) Affordances as constraints on the control of stance. Hum Mov Sci 7:265–300. doi:10.1016/0167-9457(88)90014-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodenacker WG (1970) Methodisches Konstruieren. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth K (1986) Modellbildung fur das methodische Konstruieren ohne und mit Rechnerunterstutzung. VDI-Z, Berlin, pp 21–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders JT (1997) An ontology of affordances. Ecol Psychol 9:97–112. doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0901_4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge PM (1990) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Currency Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan JG, Kortuem G (2006) Affordance-based design of physical interfaces for ubiquitous environments. In: Proceedings of Ubiquitous Computing Systems; Third International Symposium, UCS 2006, Seoul, Korea. LNCS 4239, pp 183–199. Springer, Berlin

  • Simon HA (1996) The sciences of the artificial, vol 3. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • St. Amant R (1999) User interface affordances in a planning representation. Hum Comput Interact 14(3):317–354. doi:10.1207/S15327051HCI1403_3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoffregen TA (2000) Affordances and events. Ecol Psychol 12(1):1–28. doi:10.1207/S15326969ECO1201_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suh NP (1990) The principles of design. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh NP (2001) Axiomatic design: advances and applications. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Turing AM (1959) Can a machine think? Mind 59:236

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Turvey MT (1992) Affordances and prospective control: an outline of the ontology. Ecol Psychol 4:173–187. doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0403_3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullman DG (2002) The mechanical design process, vol 3. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Warell AV (1999) Introducing a use perspective in product design theory and methodology. In: Proceedings of ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, Las Vegas, NV. Paper no. DETC/DTM-8782

  • Warren WH (1984) Perceiving affordances: visual guidance of stair climbing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 10:683–703. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.10.5.683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren WH (1995) Constructing an Econiche. In: Flach J, Hancock JP, Caird J, Vicente K (eds) Global perspectives on the ecology of human–machine systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner P (1997) Why interaction is more powerful than algorithms. Commun ACM 40(5):80–91. doi:10.1145/253769.253801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegner P (1998) Interactive foundations of computing. Theor Comput Sci 192(2):315–351. doi:10.1016/S0304-3975(97)00154-0

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Vicente K, Rasmussen J (1990) Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 22(4):589–606. doi:10.1109/21.156574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • You H, Chen K (2007) Applications of affordance and semantics in product design. Des Stud 28(1):23–38. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2006.07.002

    Google Scholar 

  • Zebrowitz LA, Collins MA (1997) Accurate social perception at zero acquaintance: the affordances of a Gibsonian approach. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 1:204–233. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0103_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clemson Research in Engineering Design and Optimization (CREDO) Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634-0921, USA

    Jonathan R. A. Maier & Georges M. Fadel

Authors
  1. Jonathan R. A. Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georges M. Fadel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georges M. Fadel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maier, J.R.A., Fadel, G.M. Affordance based design: a relational theory for design. Res Eng Design 20, 13–27 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0060-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0060-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation