>
> Dear Colleagues--
>
> 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 ChildrenUs Concepts of Evolution
>
> MARIANE HEDEGAARD
> University of Aarhus
>
> This article focuses on variations in childrenUs 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 childrenUs 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 childrenUs 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 participantsU
> 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 childrenUs development of a classroom play are
> examined. Diversity and fluidity of intersubjectivity will be
> discussed.
>