INTERACTIVE MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT
LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION
Prof. dr. Mariek Vanden Abeele
A digital society?
Interactive and entertainment media are deeply integrated into our everyday life
They have significantly altered ‘the way we do things’
o Changes in our individual lives
o Changes in our society
KEY CONCEPT LECTURE 1
Technological affordances
Functional, relational, contextual
Threshold criteria for affordances
Features vs. affordances
Function creep, unintended consequences
Interactivity at the level of the medium, source, message
Model of interactivity effects
Cognitive, attitudinal & behavioral effects of interactivity
Social structures
Agency
Duality of structure and agency
Interactive and entertainment media as contributors to social change – or to reproducing social
structures – through their capacity to make us do things in new ways
THIS LECTURE
1. WHAT is interactivity?
2. HOW does interactivity affect how individual users interact with and respond to media (psychological
perspective)?
3. HOW do interactive and entertainment media change ‘the way we do things’ in society (sociological
perspective)?
WHAT IS INTERACTIVITY?
AFFORDANCES THEORY
Is interactivity a technological affordance?
1
,Recap affordances theory
What are technological affordances?
“Perceptions of an object’s utility, its possibilities for enabling (& constraining) human action” (Gibson, 1986)
Functional view affordances enable or constrain particular behavior outcomes
Relational view they ‘exist’ in relation to a user who must perceive them
Contextual view (physical, social, cultural, political, …) contexts impact users’ perceptions of them
(through socialization, rules, …)
JESUS EXAMPLE
Functional:
o water does not afford walkability to humans, while it does afford walkability to small insects
(water spiders, ….)
o Affordances CREATE A LINK BETWEEN AN OBJECT (water, technology) AND AN OUTCOME
(walking, calling, messaging, …) FOR A USER (person, animal, …)
Relational:
o ‘users’ of water may differ in the extent to which they perceive water to be walkable. Jesus
may perceive the walkability of water differently from me.
Contextual:
THE AFFORDANCES CHECKLIST
Three threshold criteria to be an affordance:
CRITERIA #1: THE PROPOSED AFFORDANCE IS NEITHER THE OBJECT NOR A FEATURE OF THE OBJECT
the relationship between person and object means that “affordances neither belong to the environment nor the
individual, but rather to the relationship between individuals and their perceptions of environments”
(Parchoma, 2014, p. 361).
Structural features of technology are NOT Affordances of technology
design elements that offer “specific types of rules and resources, or capabilities, offered by the system”
CRITERIA #2: THE PROPOSED AFFORDANCE IS NOT AN OUTCOME
Outcomes ARE NOT affordances of the technology;
Affordances are the ‘means’ to achieve a goal, because they may an outcome possible;
but affordances can inherently lead to multiple outcomes – depending on the actor’s goal.
BV: documenting protests
Cf. unintended consequences
2
, à Function creep: the gradual widening of the use of a system or technology beyond its original
intentions
o Belgian coast to use smart cameras against corona virus
Transmigrants?
Parking tickets?
Detecting crime?
Goals and Outcomes are multiple, yet the affordances (recordability, …) remain the same
CRITERIA #3: THE PROPOSED AFFORDANCE HAS VARIABILITY
Features are present or absent
Affordances are gradual (technologies can vary in the extent to which they ‘afford’ something
IS INTERACTIVITY AN AFFORDANCE?
Criteria #1: not an object, nor a feature
Criteria #2: not an outcome of technology use
Criteria #3: variability
AFFORDANCES THEORY
a technology can afford us to interact with it, and it can afford this interaction to a lesser or greater degree
à Is interactivity a technological affordance?
IS INTERACTIVITY AN AFFORDANCE?
YES!
Criteria #1: Interactivity is not an object, nor a feature
Criteria #2: Interactivity is not an outcome of technology use
Criteria #3: Technologies show variability in their interactivity
Interactivity draws from certain structural features that are designed into the technology
An object or technology is well-designed when its affordances are readily and easily perceivable from
its features
o Slecht design deur waar ‘pull’ op staat, maar er is geen klink
TECHNOLOGICAL FEATURES AND AFFORDANCES
Interactivity is an affordance that users can perceive when the structural features of a technological interface
are well-designed.
We have learnt (i.e., affordances are contextual) that we can interact with text with this font color and that is
underlined the hyperlink is a feature that needs to be present for users to interact with a website/text.
3
, ARE THE FOLLOWING AFFORDANCES?
Hashtags #
Fake news
As a side note…
Affordances remains a fuzzy concept, that is often misused… you may notice this when processing the literature
for this course…
INTERACTIVITY: AN INDIVIDUAL IN INTERACTION WITH TECHNOLOGY
HOW does interactivity affect how individual users interact with and respond to media
(psychological perspective)?
INDIVIDUALS ‘IN INTERACTION’ WITH TECHNOLOGY
What is the psychology of interactivity?
In other words:
When individuals interact with technology…
1. Where is interactivity situated?
2. What are the psychological effects on how users engage with the activity?
3. Is there relevant between- and within-person variability?
Note: we adopt a psychological view here,
Core assumptions:
Individuals have cognitions, feelings, behaviors.
There are meaningful differences between individuals (between-person variability), and one individual can
think, feel and behave differently at different times/in different contexts (within-person variability)
INTERACTIVITY AS ‘COMMUNICATION’
When a user interacts with a technology…
o They interact with an ‘interface’
= a communication system that translates the user’s goal into outcomes
BV: toetsenbord Nokia gsm
WHERE IS INTERACTIVITY SITUATED?
At the level of the source, the medium and the message
Variability in interactivity
= to what extent can the source, medium and message be altered by
the user?
4
LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION
Prof. dr. Mariek Vanden Abeele
A digital society?
Interactive and entertainment media are deeply integrated into our everyday life
They have significantly altered ‘the way we do things’
o Changes in our individual lives
o Changes in our society
KEY CONCEPT LECTURE 1
Technological affordances
Functional, relational, contextual
Threshold criteria for affordances
Features vs. affordances
Function creep, unintended consequences
Interactivity at the level of the medium, source, message
Model of interactivity effects
Cognitive, attitudinal & behavioral effects of interactivity
Social structures
Agency
Duality of structure and agency
Interactive and entertainment media as contributors to social change – or to reproducing social
structures – through their capacity to make us do things in new ways
THIS LECTURE
1. WHAT is interactivity?
2. HOW does interactivity affect how individual users interact with and respond to media (psychological
perspective)?
3. HOW do interactive and entertainment media change ‘the way we do things’ in society (sociological
perspective)?
WHAT IS INTERACTIVITY?
AFFORDANCES THEORY
Is interactivity a technological affordance?
1
,Recap affordances theory
What are technological affordances?
“Perceptions of an object’s utility, its possibilities for enabling (& constraining) human action” (Gibson, 1986)
Functional view affordances enable or constrain particular behavior outcomes
Relational view they ‘exist’ in relation to a user who must perceive them
Contextual view (physical, social, cultural, political, …) contexts impact users’ perceptions of them
(through socialization, rules, …)
JESUS EXAMPLE
Functional:
o water does not afford walkability to humans, while it does afford walkability to small insects
(water spiders, ….)
o Affordances CREATE A LINK BETWEEN AN OBJECT (water, technology) AND AN OUTCOME
(walking, calling, messaging, …) FOR A USER (person, animal, …)
Relational:
o ‘users’ of water may differ in the extent to which they perceive water to be walkable. Jesus
may perceive the walkability of water differently from me.
Contextual:
THE AFFORDANCES CHECKLIST
Three threshold criteria to be an affordance:
CRITERIA #1: THE PROPOSED AFFORDANCE IS NEITHER THE OBJECT NOR A FEATURE OF THE OBJECT
the relationship between person and object means that “affordances neither belong to the environment nor the
individual, but rather to the relationship between individuals and their perceptions of environments”
(Parchoma, 2014, p. 361).
Structural features of technology are NOT Affordances of technology
design elements that offer “specific types of rules and resources, or capabilities, offered by the system”
CRITERIA #2: THE PROPOSED AFFORDANCE IS NOT AN OUTCOME
Outcomes ARE NOT affordances of the technology;
Affordances are the ‘means’ to achieve a goal, because they may an outcome possible;
but affordances can inherently lead to multiple outcomes – depending on the actor’s goal.
BV: documenting protests
Cf. unintended consequences
2
, à Function creep: the gradual widening of the use of a system or technology beyond its original
intentions
o Belgian coast to use smart cameras against corona virus
Transmigrants?
Parking tickets?
Detecting crime?
Goals and Outcomes are multiple, yet the affordances (recordability, …) remain the same
CRITERIA #3: THE PROPOSED AFFORDANCE HAS VARIABILITY
Features are present or absent
Affordances are gradual (technologies can vary in the extent to which they ‘afford’ something
IS INTERACTIVITY AN AFFORDANCE?
Criteria #1: not an object, nor a feature
Criteria #2: not an outcome of technology use
Criteria #3: variability
AFFORDANCES THEORY
a technology can afford us to interact with it, and it can afford this interaction to a lesser or greater degree
à Is interactivity a technological affordance?
IS INTERACTIVITY AN AFFORDANCE?
YES!
Criteria #1: Interactivity is not an object, nor a feature
Criteria #2: Interactivity is not an outcome of technology use
Criteria #3: Technologies show variability in their interactivity
Interactivity draws from certain structural features that are designed into the technology
An object or technology is well-designed when its affordances are readily and easily perceivable from
its features
o Slecht design deur waar ‘pull’ op staat, maar er is geen klink
TECHNOLOGICAL FEATURES AND AFFORDANCES
Interactivity is an affordance that users can perceive when the structural features of a technological interface
are well-designed.
We have learnt (i.e., affordances are contextual) that we can interact with text with this font color and that is
underlined the hyperlink is a feature that needs to be present for users to interact with a website/text.
3
, ARE THE FOLLOWING AFFORDANCES?
Hashtags #
Fake news
As a side note…
Affordances remains a fuzzy concept, that is often misused… you may notice this when processing the literature
for this course…
INTERACTIVITY: AN INDIVIDUAL IN INTERACTION WITH TECHNOLOGY
HOW does interactivity affect how individual users interact with and respond to media
(psychological perspective)?
INDIVIDUALS ‘IN INTERACTION’ WITH TECHNOLOGY
What is the psychology of interactivity?
In other words:
When individuals interact with technology…
1. Where is interactivity situated?
2. What are the psychological effects on how users engage with the activity?
3. Is there relevant between- and within-person variability?
Note: we adopt a psychological view here,
Core assumptions:
Individuals have cognitions, feelings, behaviors.
There are meaningful differences between individuals (between-person variability), and one individual can
think, feel and behave differently at different times/in different contexts (within-person variability)
INTERACTIVITY AS ‘COMMUNICATION’
When a user interacts with a technology…
o They interact with an ‘interface’
= a communication system that translates the user’s goal into outcomes
BV: toetsenbord Nokia gsm
WHERE IS INTERACTIVITY SITUATED?
At the level of the source, the medium and the message
Variability in interactivity
= to what extent can the source, medium and message be altered by
the user?
4
