Actant affordances: a brief history of affordance theory and a Latourian extension for education technology research

Craig Blewett,Wayne Hugo

doi:10.14426/cristal.v4i1.50

Abstract

Affordance theory provides a useful lens to explore the action opportunities that arise between users and technology, especially in education. However developments in the theory have resulted both in confusion and misapplication, due partly to issues related to affordance theory’s ontology. This paper outlines two competing perspectives on affordances by Gibson and Norman, before arguing that Latour’s theory of ‘actants’ provides a useful middle way between these competing positions. This ‘actant affordance’ provides new opportunities for undertaking educational technology research that focuses on the network of negotiations taking place between actants (student, teacher, technology, pedagogy, etc.) rather than studying causality or simple binaries.

Highlights

It is theory, as Einstein once said, ‘which decides what can be observed’
Developments within affordance theory, while extending our understanding of its use as a research perspective, have resulted in heated debates with some even arguing for its abandonment
This paper explores firstly, the development of affordance theory from Gibson’s initial conceptualisation of an affordance, through Norman’s extension of affordances, to the resultant bewilderment on how to use affordance analytically

Summary

Introduction

As Einstein once said, ‘which decides what can be observed’. Within social sciences, and education research, shifts are taking place in how theoretical perspectives are used to approach research. There are several lenses that embody the sociomaterial paradigm, where these lenses serve ‘as a sensitizing device to recognize and theorize the intertwining of the material and the social’ (Mueller et al, 2012). One of these sociomaterial lenses is affordance theory. While affordance theory, within the greater sociomaterial perspective, provides a useful lens to explore educational research, like most theories it is far from uncontested. Developments within affordance theory, while extending our understanding of its use as a research perspective, have resulted in heated debates with some even arguing for its abandonment

Blewett and Hugo

Gibsonian affordances

Conclusion