See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317642190

AFFORDANCE THEORY IN SOCIAL MEDIA RESEARCH: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

AND SYNTHESIS OF THE LITERATURE

Conference Paper · June 2017

CITATIONS READS

10 3,156

2 authors:

Farjam Eshraghian Najmeh Hafezieh

University of Westminster Royal Holloway
7 PUBLICATIONS   82 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   87 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Farjam Eshraghian on 17 June 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 AFFORDANCE THEORY IN SOCIAL MEDIA RESEARCH:
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND SYNTHESIS OF THE LITER-
ATURE

Research in Progress

Hafezieh, Najmeh, University of Edinburgh Business School, Edinburgh, UK,

[email protected]
Eshraghian, Farjam, University of Westminster Business School, London, UK,
[email protected]

Abstract
Social media technologies continue transforming various dimensions of social and organisational life
through possibilities they present for goal-oriented actions of diverse users/ user groups. The notion of
affordances that explains these possibilities has witnessed popularity among IS scholars to study these
technologies. However, since the concept itself has been under ongoing development, its use in study-
ing social media technologies has been focused on identifying technical affordances, perception and
actualisations of these affordances, or the social and organisational implications of such affordances.
In this research-in-progress paper, we present our attempt to systematically review and synthesise the
literature to examine the effects of social media affordances. In addition, we aim to systematically re-
view the existing literature to explore how the concept of affordance has been employed in social me-
dia research, to uncover the effects of social media affordances and present a comprehensive frame-
work of these affordances effects and identify areas for future research.
Keywords: Social media, Literature review, IT effects, Affordances theory, Social Media effects

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017

Affordance theory in social media research

1 Introduction
Social media technologies are continuously transforming and re-defining people’s communication,
collaboration, consumption and creation manners (Aakhus et al., 2014; Aral et al., 2013). These tech-
nologies have revolutionised not only the way that organisations relate to their customers and markets
but also to their employees. For instance, social media has been shown to be integral in marketing
practices such as customers social media participations and their behavioural outcomes (Goh et al.,
2013; Rishika et al., 2013), social contagion and peer to peer marketing (Aral and Walker, 2011; Peng
et al., 2014).
Social media are also rapidly changing the ways that organisations relate to their employees or sourc-
ing new ideas. In particular, social media are transforming the communication and knowledge ex-
change patterns among employees within organisations. The role of social media in communication
activities of employees within organisations and its implications has been researched (Leonardi, 2013;
Treem and Leonardi, 2012). While several studies have also investigated the impact of social media on
knowledge sharing and exchange among employees and the impact of its visibility on facilitating the
interpersonal and knowledge-related interactions (Leonardi and Meyer, 2015) and on creating more
innovative products and services (Leonardi, 2014), other studies suggested the paradoxical or adverse
consequences of these actions (Majchrzak et al., 2013).
In addition to this transformational nature of social media in internal or external relationships of or-
ganisations, social media have disrupted several industries such as travel and tourism (Orlikowski and
Scott 2014), retail (Borah and Tellis, 2016), and news and media (Dellarocas et al., 2013) and is recon-
figuring others such as healthcare (Kallinikos and Tempini, 2014). Despite the widespread adoption of
various types of social media and increasingly growing research on them (Van Osch and Coursaris,
2015), their social and organisational implications is still in its infancy (Aral et al., 2013; Kane et al.,
2014). To avoid the deterministic perspective of technology impact and understand how social media
use by human actors facilitates such changes in organisation and industry level, a theoretical perspec-
tive is required that does not prioritise material or social. To this end, the concept of affordances, that
has been used in studies of IT and organisations (Robey et al., 2013; Zammuto et al., 2007) provides a
useful theoretical lens to explain the relationship between social and material, and understand the con-
sequences.
In this regard, several scholars have also proposed the concept of affordances as a useful theoretical
lens to provide understanding of social media phenomenon in social and organisational life (Ellison et
al., 2014; Majchrzak et al., 2013; Treem and Leonardi, 2012). Despite valuable and insightful findings
of these studies, our understanding of social media technologies and their effects is still evolving and
the extant research has not comprehensively addressed the effects of such technologies.
The notion of affordances, as a concept under ongoing debate, has been employed in variety of ways
to study social media technologies. For example, while some studies have focused on the users’ per-
ception or actualisation of affordances, others have explored the affordances they provide for the users
or the implications of such affordances. Notwithstanding the significance of social media technologies
and their affordances, no research has tried to integrate and synthesise the findings from this extant
literature. In this study, we adopt “affordance effects” based on Pozzi et al.’s (2014) proposed frame-
work to explore the effects of affordance actualisation as a result of users’ goal-oriented actions on
social media. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to systematically review the existing literature to ex-
plore how the concept of affordance has been employed in social media research, to uncover the ef-
fects of social media affordances and present a comprehensive framework of these affordances effects
and identify areas for future research.

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 2

Affordance theory in social media research

2 Theoretical Framework: Affordances

Originally founded in ecological psychology, affordances explain how actors perceive the properties
of the environment or the objects in the environment to perform actions (Gibson, 1966). Affordances,
in spite of being inherent in the objects or artefacts, are not their properties and they are relational to
the actors and are required to be perceived to produce intended actions (Gibson, 1979), otherwise
might lead to ‘false affordances’ (Gaver, 1991). Although Gibson referred to man-made objects or
tools, it was Norman’s work that introduced affordances in technology design by focusing on every-
day objects. Norman’s (1988) original view of the concept as the perceived and actual properties of
objects is in contrast with Gibson’s perspective. He later distinguished between affordances and per-
ceived affordances that these two should match in a good design (Norman, 1999). Subsequently, his
view has been clarified further in the new edition of his book where affordances are explained as “the
relationship between properties of the artefacts and capabilities of the users that establishes the way
that the artefact would be used” (Norman, 2013, p. 11).
Despite the debates around it in its original field of ecological psychology as properties of the envi-
ronment (Turvey, 1992) or properties of relationship between actors and the environment (Chemero,
2003; Stoffregen, 2003), the concept has attracted the attention of IS researchers. Since explaining and
conceptualising the relationship between the social and the material have been the central concern for
Information System (IS) researchers and more recent perspectives on this relationship reject the for-
mer dualism between people and material means (Orlikowski and Scott, 2008; Orlikowski, 2007), the
concept of affordances has been proposed as a powerful notion in providing in-depth understanding of
the dynamics of constitutive entanglement between social and material in organisational practice
(Faraj and Azad, 2012; Fayard and Weeks, 2014; Robey et al., 2012). As Gibson incipiently noted,
affordances cut across the subjective-objective dichotomy.
Although the concept has been proved helpful in circumventing social or technological determinism,
the literature has focused on technological affordances (identifying existing affordances), particular
users/ user groups (e.g. organisations) or specific aspects of relational nature of affordances (e.g. per-
ception, actualization). In addressing this shortcoming, Pozzi et al. (2014), building on Bernhard et
al.’s (2013) framework, developed a four-stage framework of affordances by integrating the literature
of affordance theory in IS research. This framework includes four stages: ‘affordances existence’, ‘af-
fordances perceptions’, ‘affordances actualization’ and ‘affordances effects’ explaining the cognitive
process of affordances emergence. As a result of interactions between IT artefacts and actors, that are
perceived and actualised as a result of goal-oriented actions that finally produce results/effects.
The concept of affordance has witnessed popularity in the context of social media as several scholars
adopted the concept to explain the role of social media in organisations. For example, Treem and
Leonardi (2012) in a comprehensive review of social media literature introduced four affordances of
these technologies, visibility, editability, persistence and association to explain their implications for
organisational communication processes such as ‘socialisation’, ‘information sharing’ and ‘power re-
lations’. In addition to the use of concept for social media in organisational context (enterprise social
media) (Ellison et al., 2014; Majchrzak et al., 2013) to explain knowledge sharing mechanisms, it has
been proved useful in the context of collective social action (Zheng and Yu, 2016) and social change
(Mohajerani et al., 2015).
While Pozzi et al.’s (2014) framework is based on 25 studies, only four provided evidence about af-
fordance effects. While their four-stage framework is more developed on the first three stages of exist-
ence, perception and actualisation (as most of the literature has focused on these areas), the final stage
of effects as the short or long term effects of behaviours is lacking. This is particularly important in the
context of social media technologies as according to Markus and Silver (2008, p. 627), “[t]he continu-
al emergence of new technologies inevitably requires ongoing conceptual development”. Thus, as they
have suggested IS researchers to focus on the outcomes of actualization process, we aim to fill this gap

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 3

Affordance theory in social media research

by exploring the strand of research on social media that employed affordances concept to provide a
synthesis of literature and comprehensive framework for understanding of the effects of affordances
related to social media technologies and areas for future research. This would provide significant con-
tribution to the literature of affordances.

3 Research Method
This study employs a systematic literature review approach (Boell and Cecez-Kecmanovic, 2015) to
review the research on social media affordances to investigate the wider effects of their affordances.
This approach is in line with the aim of our study to comprehensively review and summarise the ex-
tant literature that applies affordance theory to study social media. In this regard, we followed the
guidelines and steps that have been presented for systematic literature reviews in the field of infor-
mation systems (IS) (Boell and Cecez-Kecmanovic, 2015; Okoli and Schabram, 2015). Figure 1 de-
picts the primary phases and specific tasks in each phase for this study.

2. Conducting the search and identi-

fying the studies
- Identifying sources based on the
search protocol
- Selecting the sources based on the
1. Planning inclusion and exclusion criteria 3. Writing and report-
- Establishing the purpose - Finalising the sources ing the results
and rationale of the study - Discussing the results
- Specifying research ques- of the analysis
tions - Presenting the synthe-
- Developing a protocol for sis of the sources
the study: search terms, 3. Analysing and synthesising
search strategy, inclusion - Extracting the applicable data from
and exclusion criteria sources
- Analysing the sources descriptively
and thematically
- Synthesising the sources in descriptive
and theme-based tables

Figure 1. Methodological process of the review

3.1 Planning phase

As established in the introduction section, the purpose of this study is to integrate and synthesise ex-
tant research on social media affordances to shed light on the effects of social media affordances and
present a comprehensive framework of these affordances effects. Thus, the study is seeking to answer
the following research questions:
1- What research has been conducted on social media affordances? (Who (which authors) have
published, when (year), and where (journal, conference) in which context (field, user))?
2- What are the research designs and methods that have been adopted for research on social me-
dia affordances?
3- What social media categories has the research on social media affordances focused on?
4- What are the main findings of this extant literature? Or in other words, what are the conse-
quences/ effects of social media affordances?

In order to develop our protocol and set the boundaries for the search, in line with the study’s purpose,
we defined the overarching criterion as ‘seeking for the research on social media that has employed

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 4

Affordance theory in social media research

affordances as a conceptual lens’. In this regard, the initial keywords list and protocol was generated.
They were consulted with two other experienced scholars in systematic reviews in information sys-
tems (IS). Moreover, we did pilot searches to revise our keywords until the keywords list was finalized
in an iterative process. The list of 32 keywords1 includes: (“social media” OR “social software” OR
“web 2.0” OR “enterprise 2.0” OR “online social network” OR “microblogging” OR “collaborative
projects” OR “blogs” OR “content communities” OR “online communities” OR “social networking
sites” OR “Virtual game worlds” OR “virtual social worlds” OR “virtual worlds” OR “virtual commu-
nity” OR “enterprise social media” OR “common interest sites” OR “customer review sites” OR “user
generated content” OR “mobile phone application” OR “smartphone application” OR “social technol-
ogy” OR Facebook OR Google Plus OR Google+ OR Twitter OR YouTube OR LinkedIn OR wiki
OR Wikipedia) AND (affordance OR affordances). We did not impose any limit regarding the year of
publications as social media is considered as a new phenomenon and the majority of the studies have
been conducted over the past decade. Moreover, for the purpose of being as comprehensive as possi-
ble, we did not limit the results to any particular type of publication or research method. The inclusion
criteria were based on firstly ‘core topic of the study’ that should be on social media (platform or a
category of social media listed in the keywords) and secondly on the ‘concept of affordances’ in re-
searching social media in that study.

3.2 Conducting phase

As the largest database of peer-reviewed literature, ‘Scopus’ was selected as the resource for searching
the studies. The search for the above set of keywords (the titles, keywords and abstracts) produced 749
results on Scopus. The next step was to screen the results and exclude the items that did not meet our
criteria outlined above. Thus, the results were initially examined by title and abstract (both) and then
by full-text2 providing the title and abstract would not be sufficient for excluding the source3. To en-
sure the relevance of all included results, this screening process was conducted by both authors inde-
pendently. The initial agreement between authors was 95%, therefore, the disagreements were dis-
cussed toward the unanimous agreement for the relevance of each source. This process led to exclu-
sion of 600 sources. For further scrutiny, we also examined references of 149 included sources, which
has resulted in three additional sources at this stage. This process of screening the references is being
continued until it does not reveal new relevant sources.

3.3 Analysing and synthesising phase

The next step of the review was to extract relevant data from 152 selected sources, which includes
demographic and research-related data. Demographic data includes title of the publication, author(s)’s
name and institution, year of publication, publication type, name of the source in which the publication
has been published. Research-related data includes type of study (empirical, conceptual, literature re-
view), research context (organisational vs. non-organisational), intra or extra organisational, social
media category (e.g. social network sites, Enterprise social media (ESM), microblogging, virtual
words), social media platform(s) (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Second Life), user/ user groups, methodolo-

1The selected keywords are based on literature of social media to cover various categories of these technologies. We also add
smartphone/mobile phone applications to include mobile social media and also several of more populated platforms based on
Pew Research Centre reports.
2 In majority of cases, we had to investigate the full text to ensure the ‘affordance’ has been used as a concept not general
sense of capability of technologies.
3 By source, we mean each individual article or study. Since we have not filtered the search results by the type of the publica-
tions, our dataset includes journal article papers, conference papers and book chapters. Therefore, we refer to them as sources
in this review.

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 5

Affordance theory in social media research

gy (quantitative, qualitative, mixed), data collection methods, other theories used, affordances identi-
fied in the study, area of focus based on Markus and Silver’s (2008) technical objects/ functional af-
fordances/ symbolic expressions, stage of focus based on Pozzi et al. (2014)’s four stage framework,
consequences/ outcomes or effects of affordances explored in the study.
Not surprisingly, 89% (135) of all sources, of which 75% (114) are journal articles, 22% (33) are con-
ference proceedings and the remaining 3% (5) are book chapters, have been published in 2010 on-
ward. Both authors conducted the initial coding based on open and mainly structured coding (using
codes mentioned above) independently. The coding procedure encompassed reading the full text of the
sources (with more emphasis on theory, findings and discussion sections) to extract the codes. We cal-
culated both the coder agreement rate and Cohen’s Kappa, 85% and 78% respectively, which provided
validity and reliability of coding scheme and process. Out of 152 sources, 34 were focused on organi-
sational context, 116 on non-organisational context, and two on both. In terms of social media catego-
ry, the sources have studied diverse categories of these technologies including social network sites,
collaborative projects (wiki), mobile social media, virtual worlds and virtual game worlds, media shar-
ing, microblogging and voice microblogging, enterprise social media, and online communities.
Then, in the second round of the coding process, we adopted the method of ‘axial coding’ (Corbin and
Strauss, 2008) in order to rearrange and reduce the codes generated at the first stage of our coding at-
tempt. Using this method, by assigning the earlier codes to the key and underlying categories, we
could recognise the main attributes and dimensions of each category (Charmaz, 2006) in our analysis.
All the papers were coded using NVivo 10 software package. Its capabilities regarding the coding pro-
cess and tabulating the categories significantly facilitated the analysing process of this study. As a re-
sult of this coding process, all affordances identified in the studies were categorised to seven classes of
navigability, socialisation, information sharing, collaboration, association, ubiquitous communication,
and personalisation. The result of analysis of social media affordances for each category of ef-
fects/outcomes and the main affordances in each category are presented in Table 1.
As we stated above, the studies cover a range of different types of social media platforms. The most
researched category of social media is social network sites, particularly Facebook. The combination of
various social media platforms constitutes the next most widely studied category (i.e. several social
media platforms including social network sites, microblogging, wiki, media sharing). While the af-
fordances of these platforms have been investigated across different contexts and disciplines, the cate-
gory of virtual worlds has been researched in education context (primary, secondary or higher educa-
tion). As our analysis shows, the body of literature lacks research on affordances of online communi-
ties, particularly the Q&A systems.

Context:
organisation- Intra/extra
Effects/outcomes al/non- organisati- User group Main affordances
category organisational onal example discussed
fostering collaborative and social collaboration, in-
learning and augmenting learn- non- students and formation sharing,
ing experience organisational n/a pupils socialisation
teenagers,
privacy, disclosure, self- non- university navigability, social-
presentation organisational n/a students isation, association
SMEs, navigability, associ-
NGOs, pro- ation, information
testers and sharing, ubiquitous
social change both extra activists communication

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 6

Affordance theory in social media research

higher levels of engagement, association, sociali-

knowledge sharing and reuse organisational intra employees sation, navigability
increased ambiguities and ten- association, naviga-
sions, decreased engagement organisational intra employees bility
personalisation,
enhancing or changing relation- socialisation, navi-
ship with external stakeholders organisational extra organisations gability
new forms of publishing, collab-
orative authoring and sharing non- experts, blog-
expertise organisational n/a gers socialisation
perception of spatial or temporal non- navigability, ubiqui-
presence organisational n/a general user tous communication
sufferers of navigability, per-
social support and self-care for non- specific con- sonalisation, infor-
users with special conditions organisational n/a ditions mation sharing
personalisation,
government navigability, ubiqui-
government citizen relationship organisational extra bodies tous communication
collaboration, in-
supporting teaching develop- non- lecturers and formation sharing,
ment organisational n/a students socialisation
non- association, collab-
moral economy organisational n/a travellers oration
establishing new control and association, person-
governance mechanisms in the alisation, navigabil-
organisation organisational intra employees ity
media, organ-
isations, pub- association, sociali-
crisis management both extra lic sation
non-
social capital organisational n/a general user association
information for professional hiring profes- association, sociali-
practices organisational extra sionals sation, navigability
Table 1. Categories of social media outcomes from synthesis of the literature

4 Findings and Discussion

As we outlined previously, the purpose of this study is twofold: to understand social and organisation-
al effects of social media as technological phenomenon, and contribute to discussions of affordances
by exploring the affordances effects. In what follows, we report the findings based on our analysis of
152 sources and discuss how this body of research has used affordance theory. Using the constructs
from Markus and Silver (2008), we have found that the majority of studies (over 70%) in each catego-
ry of effects/outcomes have focused on ‘functional affordances’ that shows the studies have focused
on users’ goals and capabilities in relation to the technology. Several studies in each category have
also drawn to ‘technical objects’, but about 50% of such studies have used ‘technical objects’ along
with ‘functional affordances’. In addition, while the implied reference to ‘symbolic expressions’ con-
struct is varied across categories, it has the highest reference in intra-organisational use of social media
by organisations. This category of studies is concerned about the values and intents of users (employ-
ees or organisation itself) in the use of social media in organisations such as studies in the category of
‘establishing new control and governance mechanisms in the organisation’ (e.g. Vaast and Kaganer
(2013)).
Moreover, we have found interesting trends in the sources according to Pozzi et al.’s (2014) constructs
(existence, perception, actualisation, and effect). The majority of studies in each category have fo-

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 7

Affordance theory in social media research

cused on the ‘perception’ stage, this result is not surprising as about 80% of sources cite Gibson or
Norman as the primary reference for the concept. The second most discussed stage is ‘existence’, fol-
lowed by ‘actualisation’. Only few studies have explicitly discussed the effects of technology af-
fordances. The main outcome categories that discuss the actualisation process include ‘social change’,
‘fostering collaborative and social learning and augmenting learning experience’ and ‘enhancing or
changing relationship with external stakeholders’. Our analysis on these constructs are ongoing.
One interesting observation in our analysis is that the studies on social media affordances have primar-
ily focused on the positive outcomes or effects of using these technologies in different contexts. Only
a few studies in intra-organisational use of social media (or enterprise social media) have found con-
flicting outcomes that have been categorised as ‘increased ambiguities and tensions, decrease engage-
ment’. For example, Majchrzak et al. (2013: 41) identified four affordances of “metavoicing”, “trig-
gered attending”, “network-informed associating”, and “generative role-taking” for enterprise social
media in getting involved in knowledge conversions beyond the boundaries of an organisation and
found that these affordances, which provide different ways for engagement, trigger theoretical mecha-
nisms leading to positive or negative (unforeseen) outcomes. Gibbs et al. (2013) studied tension in
“visibility-invisibility, engagement-disengagement, and sharing-control” and the way that employees
strategically handle these tensions “to preserve both openness and ambiguity” (p. 102). Leonardi et al.
(2013) also note that social media affordances lead to “enhanced opportunities for social learning
within organizations which have (positive or negative) implications for at least four common process-
es within organizations: Social Capital Formation, Boundary Work, Attention Allocation, and Social
Analytics” (p. 6).

5 Conclusion, Future Steps and Expected Contributions

This research-in-progress study is to examine the literature of social media affordances to understand
how the concept of affordances has been used and to synthesise and classify the effects of social media
affordances. This is to address Markus and Silver’s (2008) conceptualization of affordances to study
IT effects and also to build on Pozzi et al.’s (2014) framework of affordances in IS discipline. The re-
sults of analysing 152 studies portray varied use of affordances as a theoretical concept in social media
research. For the next steps of our analysis, we focus on two areas. First, we are exploring what other
theories have been used alongside affordances theory in studying social media. This will also build on
previous literature reviews on social media, particularly the meta-analysis by Van Osch and Coursaris
(2015) that explored dominant theories on social media research. Second, we also continue our re-
search to analyse the studies based on affordances identified and affordances actualised to examine
what affordances predicted for social media and what actually realised and the reasons for unrealised
affordances.
The contribution of this study is twofold. First, our systematic review contributes to the body of re-
search on social media technologies and their effects and particularly to other insightful reviews con-
ducted on social media such as the meta-analysis by Van Osch and Coursaris (2015). Since Van Osch
and Coursaris’ (2015) meta-analysis has focused on the period of 2004-2011, our study can contribute
to their work by exploring the development of social media studies after 2011 (as 74% of studies in
our review were published during 2012-2016). Second, this review contributes to the affordance-based
studies of social media by suggesting several areas for future research. One area that deserves more
attention is the role of ‘symbolic expressions’ to understand what role the users’ values and intents,
and their social context play in affordances perception and actualisation processes. Our analysis re-
veals further investigation should be particularly in non-organisational context. Another area that we
suggest more research is needed is the negative effects or outcomes of social media affordances.

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 8

Affordance theory in social media research

References
Aakhus M, Ågerfalk PJ, Lyytinen K, et al. (2014) Symbolic Action Research in Information
Systems Introduction to the Special Issue. MIS Quarterly 38(4): 1187–1200.
Aral S and Walker D (2011) Creating Social Contagion Through Viral Product Design: A
Randomized Trial of Peer Influence in Networks. Management Science 57(9): 1623–
1639.
Aral S, Dellarocas C and Godes D (2013) Introduction to the Special Issue—Social Media
and Business Transformation: A Framework for Research. Information Systems
Research, INFORMS 24(1): 3–13. Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1120.0470.
Bernhard E, Recker J and Burton-jones A (2013) Understanding the actualization of a
ffordances : a Study in the Process Modeling Context. Icis 2013.
Boell SK and Cecez-Kecmanovic D (2015) On being ‘systematic’ in literature reviews in IS.
Journal of Information Technology 30: 161–173.
Borah A and Tellis GJ (2016) Halo (Spillover) Effects in Social Media: Do Product Recalls of
One Brand Hurt or Help Rival Brands? Journal of Marketing Research 53(2): 143–160.
Charmaz K (2006) Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative
analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Chemero A (2003) An Outline of a Theory of Affordances. Ecological Psychology 15(2):
181–195.
Corbin J and Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dellarocas C, Katona Z and Rand W (2013) Media, Aggregators, and the Link Economy:
Strategic Hyperlink Formation in Content Networks. Management Science 59(19):
2360–2379. Available from:
http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1710.
Ellison NB, Gibbs JL and Weber MS (2014) The Use of Enterprise Social Network Sites for
Knowledge Sharing in Distributed Organizations: The Role of Organizational
Affordances. American Behavioral Scientist, SAGE Publications Inc. 59(1): 103–123.
Available from: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
84918566800&partnerID=tZOtx3y1 (accessed 4 November 2015).
Faraj S and Azad B (2012) The Materiality of Technology: An Affordance Perspective. In:
Leonardi PM, Nardi BA, and Kallinikos J (eds), Materiality and Organizing: Social
Interaction in a Technological World, Oxford University Press , pp. 237–258.
Fayard A-L and Weeks J (2014) Affordances for practice. Information and Organization
24(4): 236–249.
Gaver WW (1991) Technology affordances. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 9

Affordance theory in social media research

Human factors in computing systems Reaching through technology - CHI ’91: 79–84.
Available from: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=108844.108856.
Gibbs JL, Rozaidi NA and Eisenberg J (2013) Overcoming the ‘Ideology of Openness’:
Probing the Affordances of Social Media for Organizational Knowledge Sharing.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19(1): 102–120. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/jcc4.12034.
Gibson JJ (1966) Introduction - What are the senses? The senses considered as perceptual
systems, Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Available from: http://doi.apa.org/psycinfo/1966-
35026-000.
Gibson JJ (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Available from:
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8BSLBQAAQBAJ&pgis=1.
Goh K, Heng C and Lin Z (2013) Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior :
Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer- Generated Content Social Media
Brand Community and Consumer Behavior : Quantifying the Relative Impact of User-
and Marketer-Generated Content. (August 2014).
Kallinikos J and Tempini N (2014) Patient Data as Medical Facts : Social Media Practices as
a Patient Data as Medical Facts : Social Media Practices as a Foundation for Medical
Knowledge Creation. (April 2015).
Kane G, Alavi M, Labianca GJ, et al. (2014) What’s different about social media networks? A
framework and research agenda. MIS quarterly 38(1): 274–304.
Leonardi P, Huysman M and Steinfield C (2013) Enterprise social media: Definition, history,
and prospects for the study of social technologies in organizations. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication 19(1): 1–19. Available from:
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
84885929850&partnerID=tZOtx3y1 (accessed 15 November 2015).
Leonardi PM (2013) When does technology use enable network change in organizations? A
comparative study of feature use and shared affordances. MIS quarterly 37(3): 749–775.
Leonardi PM (2014) Social Media , Knowledge Sharing , and Innovation : Toward a Theory
of Communication Visibility. Information systems Research 25(4): 796–816.
Leonardi PM and Meyer SR (2015) Social Media as Social Lubricant: How Ambient
Awareness Eases Knowledge Transfer. American Behavioral Scientist 59(1): 10–34.
Available from: http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0002764214540509.
Majchrzak A, Faraj S, Kane G, et al. (2013) The Contradictory Influence of Social Media
Affordances on Online Communal Knowledge Sharing. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication 19(1): 38–55. Available from:
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
84885897490&partnerID=tZOtx3y1 (accessed 30 January 2016).

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 10

Affordance theory in social media research

Markus ML and Silver MS (2008) A Foundation for the Study of IT Effects : A New Look at
DeSanctis and Poole ’ s Concepts of Structural Features and Spirit *. Journal of the
Association for Information Systems 9(10): 609–632.
Mohajerani A, Baptista J and Nandhakumar J (2015) Exploring the role of social media in
importing logics across social contexts: The case of IT SMEs in Iran. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 95: 16–31.
Norman D (1988) Norman 1988 Design Of Everyday Things.pdf.
Norman D (1999) Affordance, conventions and Design. Interactions: 38–42.
Norman D (2013) The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic books.
Okoli C and Schabram K (2015) A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of
Information Systems Research. Communications of the Association for Information
Systems 10(2010): 879–910.
Orlikowski WJ (2007) Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work. Organization
Studies 28(9): 1435–1448.
Orlikowski WJ (2009) The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in
management research. Cambridge Journal of Economics 34(1): 125–141.
Orlikowski WJ and Scott S V (2008) 10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of
Technology, Work and Organization. The Academy of Management Annals 2(1): 433–
474.
Orlikowski WJ and Scott S V (2014) What Happens When Evaluation Goes Online?
Exploring Apparatuses of Valuation in the Travel Sector. Organization Science 25(3):
868–891.
Peng J, Agarwal A, Hosanagar K, et al. (2014) Toward Effective Social Contagion : A Micro
Level Analysis of the Impact of Dyadic Network Relationship. Icis 2017: 1–16.
Pozzi G, Pigni F and Vitari C (2014) Affordance Theory in the IS Discipline: a Review and
Synthesis of the Literature. Twentieth Americas Conference on Information Systems,
Savannah, 2014: 1–12.
Rishika R, Kumar A, Janakiraman R, et al. (2013) The effect of customers’ social media
participation on customer visit frequency and profitability: An empirical investigation.
Information Systems Research 24(1): 108–127.
Robey D, Raymond B and Anderson C (2012) Theorizing Information Technology as a
Material Artifact in Information Systems Research. In: Leonardi PM, Nardi BA, and
Kallinikos J (eds), Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological
World, Oxford University Press , pp. 217–236.
Robey D, Anderson C and Raymond B (2013) Information Technology, Materiality, and
Organizational Change: A Professional Odyssey. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems 14(7): 379–398. 20p. 1 Diagram.

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 11

 Affordance theory in social media research

Stoffregen T a (2003) Affordances as Properties of the Animal-Environment System.

Ecological Psychology 15(2): 115–134.
Treem JW and Leonardi PM (2012) Social Media Use in Organizations: Exploring the
Affordances of Visibility, Editablity, Persistence, and Association. Communication
Yearbook 36: 143–189.
Turvey MT (1992) Affordances and Prospective Control: An Outline of the Ontology.
Ecological Psychology.
Vaast E and Kaganer E (2013) Social media affordances and governance in the workplace:
An examination of organizational policies. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication 19(1): 78–101. Available from:
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
84885944538&partnerID=tZOtx3y1 (accessed 30 November 2015).
Van Osch W and Coursaris CK (2015) A meta-analysis of theories and topics in social media
research. In: Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, pp. 1668–1675.
Zammuto RF, Griffith TL, Majchrzak A, et al. (2007) Information technology and the
changing fabric of organization. Organization Science, Department of Management and
Marketing, University of Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia 18(5): 749–762. Available
from: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
44349154221&partnerID=40&md5=a4acd42832b489571bb1584044458729.
Zheng Y and Yu A (2016) Affordances of social media in collective action: the case of Free
Lunch for Children in China. Information Systems Journal, Blackwell Publishing Ltd:
n/a–n/a. Available from: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
84959018327&partnerID=tZOtx3y1 (accessed 9 February 2016).

Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães,Portugal, 2017 12

View publication stats