perhaps it is a bit exaggerated to speak of Leontiev's
memory studies as ecologically valid, I admit that. What
really is interesting though is that he explicitly includes
meaning-making processes in his experiments, even to the
extent of acknowledging that his subjects memorize via
short narratives. Besides he reflects on possibilities of
cross-cultural research on memory pointing to problems
current research has not solved either (e.g. equivalence).
So: of course you cannot avoid seeing a lot of weaknesses
in Leontiev's research on memory but on the other hand he
seems to belong to one of those who made a valuable effort
towards a cultural psychology of memory - the remarkable
fact being that no one gives this credit to him.
P.S.: The book of Saito is very good, I know it.
Am 30 Sep 2004 um 10:53 hat Mike Cole geschrieben:
> I am not sure of the answers to your question, Carlos.
> The connection to Bartlett is certainly appropriate and interesting
> to consider. There is a new book about barlett edited by (I think)
> Saito, which you may wish to look at.
> Leontiev's memory experiments might or might not be considered in
> light of issues of ecological validity. They used more or less
> standard experimental procedures with individual subjects and materials
> chosen by the experimenter where the goal was to remember for the
> sake of remembering and/or pleasing the experimenter.
> The issue of Leontiev vis a vis Vygotsky and both of them vis a vis
> Luria is the subject of a minor cottage industry. You might try googling
> the lchc site on, say vygotsky leontiev, or consult van der veer and
> valsiner who tell one set of stories, or see if anyone here has a better
> way to get you into the topic.
> Sorry for the rushed answer.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:43:06 PST