Abstract
Kirlik (this issue) reviews my recent (Stoffregen, 2003b) definition of affordance and suggests that it is too broad. Kirlik argues that the concept of affordance should include only things that are opportunities for action. In replying, I agree that affordance should be restricted to opportunities for action. However, I argue that action can and should include the great majority of animate behavior and possibly all of it. Finally, I argue that the concept of affordance is not unbounded but rather has strict limits.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
