Perceiving Affordances and Social Cognition

Fiebich, Anika

doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9147-2_11

Cited by 28 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems that in multilingual countries, happening and sure-fire affordances underlie the use of some languages and not others. (b) For the purpose of recognising the already existing educational affordances, it is also sensible to single out the social (Feibish 2014;Kaufmann and Clément 2007;Gaver 1996) and the canonical affordances, since these are the ones that are the most influential in maintaining the given sociolinguistic situation.…”

Section: Educational Affordancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges of multilingual education: Streamlining affordances through Dominant Language Constellations

Aronin

2019

SPILPLUS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This contribution to the special volume is written in tune with Prof Marianna Visser's seeing linguistic diversity in Africa as an asset rather than a complicating factor (2012, 2013). Multilingualism is without a doubt an advantage. With that said, multilingual education is a truly challenging enterprise. In particular, the realisation of appropriate educational affordances is a daunting task. In view of this, the aim of this chapter is to highlight the necessity of systematic managing of affordances in multilingual education and introduce the idea of affordances streamlining as an additional way for bettering the practice of multilingual teaching and learning.

show abstract

Section: Educational Affordancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges of multilingual education: Streamlining affordances through Dominant Language Constellations

Aronin

2019

SPILPLUS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, both leave out an important element that is critical for an account of affordances in the social world; even recent attempts to articulate affordances in the social domain exhibit this lack (e.g. Fiebich ). I am referring to the fact that forms of life (defined as patterns of perception and action that characterize a group of people) are structured and assign different positions to its inhabitants, and each position comes with a different set of affordances.…”

Section: Speech Affordancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech affordances: A structural take on how much we can do with our words

Ayala

2016

European J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals can do a broad variety of things with their words and enjoy different degrees of this capacity. What moderates this capacity? And in cases in which this capacity is unjustly disrupted, what is a good explanation for it? These are the questions I address here. I propose that speech capacity, understood as the capacity to do things with your words, is a structural property importantly dependent on individuals' position in a social structure. My account facilitates a non‐individualistic explanation of cases in which speech capacity is undermined due to speaker's perceived social identity, e.g. episodes of silencing. Instead of appealing to interlocutors' implicit bias against speaker's identity, a structural approach refers to the positions interlocutors occupy in the social structure and the discursive conventions operating upon those positions. I articulate my proposal drawing on the notion of affordances. Each position within a social structure is associated with its own range of speech affordances. Thus, speech capacity is a function of the probability distribution of speech affordances across positions in the structure.

show abstract

“…However, the perceiving-as in interaction is not perception of a static state. Fiebich (2014 , p. 1) makes the point that interpersonal affordances are “perceived within interactive reciprocal processes,” where the perceived agent is engaged in ongoing action processes in response to the behaviors of the other in interaction. This is also argued for by McGann (2014 , p. 26): “There is also no particular moment in time at which perceiving is ‘complete’ because such perception always occurs in the flow of on-going behavior – activity does not have to wait for it.” A continuous interaction offers a continuous stream of changing interpersonal affordances – and, recursively, engagement with these affordances changes the process of interaction.…”

Section: Interpersonal Affordances Between Agents and Selvesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, though, I propose that in bringing together ecological and enactivist views on social interactions, we need to maintain a finer-grained distinction between environmental affordances that offer opportunities for socializing, such as public spaces, and those offered by agents themselves. That is, I will argue that the perception of interpersonal affordances ( Trierweiler and Donovan, 1994 ; Richardson et al, 2007 ; Fiebich, 2014 ), defined as opportunities afforded by other agents, is indeed different from the perception of environmental affordances, given what enactivism has provided on the unique nature of agent-agent coupling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Being Perceived and Being “Seen”: Interpersonal Affordances, Agency, and Selfhood

Brancazio

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are interpersonal affordances a distinct type of affordance, and if so, what is it that differentiates them from other kinds of affordances? In this paper, I show that a hard distinction between interpersonal affordances and other affordances is warranted and ethically important. The enactivist theory of participatory sense-making demonstrates that there is a difference in coupling between agent-environment and agent-agent interactions, and these differences in coupling provide a basis for distinguishing between the perception of environmental and interpersonal affordances. Building further on this foundation for understanding interpersonal affordances, I argue that in line with some enactivist work on social cognition, interpersonal affordances ought to be considered as those that are afforded by agents and are recognized as such. Given this distinction, I also make the point that because our social conventions establish persons as more than mere agents, the direct perception of interpersonal affordances may also involve seeing others as embodied selves. Distinguishing between types of affordances thus also matters ethically: there can be harms done when an agent is not perceived as an agent, and there can be harms done when an agent is not perceived as a self.

show abstract

Perceiving Affordances and Social Cognition

Cited by 28 publications

References 41 publications

Challenges of multilingual education: Streamlining affordances through Dominant Language Constellations

Challenges of multilingual education: Streamlining affordances through Dominant Language Constellations

Speech affordances: A structural take on how much we can do with our words

Being Perceived and Being “Seen”: Interpersonal Affordances, Agency, and Selfhood

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About