Here are three abstracts of papers that have just appeared in Mind,
Culture, and ACtivity. All are worth discussion, in my view. But
I am not sure how to start such discussion. Has anyone out there
read any of these articles?
After reading Boesch's article, for example, what can/should/might
be said about the very possibility of cross-cultural research in
the positivist mode? And what might replace it?
Similar kinds of questions are raisable about each of the articles.
But is xmca a place where we might usefully enrich our understanding
of them?
Mike
------
Abstracts from articles appearing in Volume 3, No. 1 of "Mind, Culture,
and Activity":
The Seven Flaws of Cross-Cultural Psychology. The Story of a
Conversion
ERNEST E. BOESCH
University of Saarbruecken
For Alfred Lang on the occasion of his 60th birthday.
The following expands on an example that W. J. Lonner, in the not
yet published draft of a chapter, used for illustrating the method of
cross-cultural psychology, and which I take the freedom to
elaborate here. It is therefore an entirely fictional story, but all it
says is based on personal experience. One could call it, then, a true
fiction.
How Instruction Influences ChildrenŐs Concepts of Evolution
MARIANE HEDEGAARD
University of Aarhus
This article focuses on variations in childrenŐs understanding of
the evolution of species and the origin of humans, and on how
these variations are related to classroom instruction. In order to
evaluate the childrenŐs concept development as influenced by
teaching method, children from two classes who participated in a
teaching experiment throughout the third grade were interviewed.
The teaching experiment aimed at teaching the children the
theoretical concepts of evolution by teaching them to integrate
their knowledge into coherent models. Two experimental groups
from two different schools were interviewed during the middle of
the fourth grade. A control group of children from a class that had
not been taught the concepts of evolution were also interviewed.
Analyses of the interviews showed that the manner of instruction
influenced the childrenŐs conceptions, both in the area they were
taught, the evolution of species, and a related area, the origin of
humans.
Intersubjectivity Without Agreement
EUGENE MATUSOV
University of California, Santa Cruz
In this paper, there is an attempt to construct the notion of
intersubjectivity as a process of a coordination of participantsŐ
contributions in joint activity. This notion incorporates the
dynamics of both agreement and disagreement. I argue that a
traditional definition of intersubjectivity as a state of overlap of
individual understandings overemphasizes agreement and de-
emphasizes disagreement among the participants in joint activity.
It disregards disagreement at two levels: 1) by focusing only on
integrative, consensus seeking, activities, in which disagreement
among participants of joint activity often is viewed as only the
initial point of the joint activity that has to be resolved by the
final agreement (macro-level), and 2) by considering
disagreements as only nuisances or obstacles while focusing on
integrative activities (micro-level). To illustrate how disagreement
can constitute intersubjectivity at macro- and micro-levels,
examples of childrenŐs development of a classroom play are
examined. Diversity and fluidity of intersubjectivity will be
discussed.