The work of Rietveld and his colleagues offers an engaging and valuable framework for considering the relationship between art, technology, culture and habit, and challenges us to consider our ethical perspective on these things.
BruinebergJ.ChemeroA.RietveldE. (2019). General ecological information supports engagement with affordances for ‘higher’ cognition. Synthese, 196, 5231–5251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1716-9
2.
NonakaT. (2020). Locating the inexhaustible: Material, medium, and ambient information. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00447
3.
RietveldE. (2008). Situated normativity: The normative aspect of embodied cognition in unreflective action. Mind, 117(468), 973–1001. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzn050
4.
RietveldE.de HaanS.DenysD. (2013). Social affordances in context: What is it that we are bodily responsive to?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(4), 436–436. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12002038
ToroJ.KiversteinJ.RietveldE. (2020). The ecological-enactive model of disability: Why disability does not entail pathological embodiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 1162. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01162
7.
van DijkL.RietveldE.(2017). 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
8.
WithagenR.de PoelH. J.AraújoD.PeppingG.-J. (2012). Affordances can invite behavior: Reconsidering the relationship between affordances and agency. New Ideas in Psychology, 30(2), 250–258.
