Letting the affordances fool around: architectural space from the users’ point of view

Abstract

Erik Rietveld’s lecture describes the creation of architectural works from the point of view of the architects. We are curious about architectural space as a living system: what happens once the architects have left? We introduce the space syntax notion of virtual community, and suggest that this is compatible with Rietveld’s distinction between the field and the landscape of affordances.

Keywords

Affordances social cognition space syntax sociomateriality

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baggs

Chemero

(2020). The third sense of environment. In Wagman

J. B.

Blau

J. J. C.

(Eds.), Perception as information detection: Reflections on Gibson’s ecological approach to visual perception (pp. 5–20). Taylor & Francis.

Ball

(1916). Dada Manifesto. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dada_Manifesto_(1916,_Hugo_Ball)

Bruineberg

Rietveld

(2014). Self-organization, free energy minimization, and optimal grip on a field of affordances. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 599. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00599

Chemero

(2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326969ECO1502_5

Fajen

B. R.

(2007). Affordance-based control of visually guided action. Ecological Psychology, 19(4), 383–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407410701557877

Gibson

J. J.

(1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton-Mifflin.

Groák

(1992). The idea of building: Thought and action in the design and production of buildings. E & F. N. Spon.

Hillier

(1996). Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture. Cambridge University Press. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/3881/1/SITM.pdf

Hillier

Burdett

Peponis

Penn

(1987). Creating life: Or, does architecture determine anything? Architecture and Behaviour, 3(3), 233–250.

10.

Orlikowski

W. J.

(2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607081138

11.

Rietveld

(2008). Situated normativity: The normative aspect of embodied cognition in unreflective action. Mind, 117(468), 973–1001. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzn050

12.

Rietveld

Kiverstein

(2014). A rich landscape of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 26(4), 325–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2014.958035

13.

Rietveld

(2011). The paradox of spontaneity and design/designing spontaneous interactions. OASE, 85, 33–41.

14.

Sailer

(2010). The space-organisation relationship: On the shape of the relationship between spatial configuration and collective organisational behaviours [Doctoral dissertation]. Technical University of Dresden. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-38427

15.

Sailer

(2019). Through the lens of social activities: Understanding space. In Geipel

Hansmann

(Eds.), Raummaschine: Exploring manifold spaces (pp. 118–122). Jovis.

16.

Turvey

M. T.

(1992). Affordances and prospective control: An outline of the ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4(3), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326969eco0403_3

17.

Van Dijk

Rietveld

. (2018). Foregrounding sociomaterial practice in our understanding of affordances: The skilled intentionality framework. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1969. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01969

18.

Wagman

J. B.

(2020). A guided tour of Gibson’s theory of affordances. In Wagman

J. B.

Blau

J. J. C.

(Eds.), Perception as information detection: Reflections on Gibson’s ecological approach to visual perception (pp. 130–148). Taylor & Francis.

19.

Warren

W. H.

(1984). Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(5), 683–703. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.10.5.683

20.

Withagen

Araújo

de Poel

H. J.

(2017). Inviting affordances and agency. New Ideas in Psychology, 45, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2016.12.002