Whilst it is generally accepted as a positive criterion, affordance only gives the weakest of hints for interactive systems designers. This paper shows how useful it is to consider affordance as generated by a correspondence between program symmetries and user interface symmetries. Symmetries in state spaces (for instance, as might be visualised in statecharts) can be carried through to user interfaces and into user manuals, with beneficial results. Exploiting affordances, understood in this way, in addition to their well known user interface benefits, makes programs simpler and more reliable, and makes user manuals shorter.


State Space User Interface Object Oriented Programming Cyclic Symmetry Alarm Clock 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Carbone, A., Semmes, S.: A Graphic Apology for Symmetry and Implicitness, Oxford:Oxford Science Publications, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gaver, W.: “Technology Affordances,” ACM CHI’91 Conference, 79–84, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gelernter, D.: The Aesthetics of Computing, Phoenix, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gibson, J. J.: The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Boston: Houghton Miffin, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harel, D., Politi, M.: Modeling Reactive Systems with Statecharts:The StatemateApproach, McGraw-Hill, 1988.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marr, D.: Vision, New York: W. H. Freeman & Company, 1982.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Norman, D. A.: The Psychology of Everyday Things, New York: Basic Books, 1988.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Norman, D. A.: “Affordance, Conventions, and Design,” ACM Interactions,VI(3):38–43, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petroski, H.: The Pencil:A History of Design and Circumstance, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Runciman, C., Thimbleby, H.: “Equal Opportunity Interactive Systems,” InternationalJournal of Man-Machine Studies, 25(4):439–451, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thimbleby, H.: User Interface Design, Addison-Wesley, 1990Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thimbleby, H.: “A New Calculator and Why it is Necessary,” Computer Journal,38(6):418–433, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thimbleby, H.: “Calculators are Needlessly Bad,” International Journal of HumanComputerStudies, 52(6):1031–1069, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thimbleby, H.: “Analysis and Simulation of User Interfaces,” Human ComputerInteraction 2000, BCSConference on Human-Computer Interaction, edited by Mc-Donald, S, Waern, Y. & Cockton, G., XIV:221–237, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thimbleby, H.: “Permissive User Interfaces,” International Journal of HumanComputerStudies, 54(3):333–350, 2001.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thimbleby, H., Cairns, P., Jones, M.: “Usability Analysis with Markov Models,”ACM Transactions on Computer Human Interaction, 8(2):99–132, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weyl, H.: Symmetry, Princeton University Press, 1952.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold Thimbleby
    • 1
  1. 1.University College LondonLondon

Personalised recommendations