"I don't think Cobb would have used 'double stimulation' in the past. The
emphasis on individual construction seems closer to LSV's 'everyday' than
'scientific'. So using Yrjv's framework, the rules, division of labor, and
artifacts may be quite different between Cobb and Vygotsky, although you
could find small groups here and there. But where 'double stimulation'
fits in the everyday-scientific dimension has me a bit puzzled. A bit of
both?"
In a functional sense "double stimulation" would be more along the lines of
scientific, since by its essence it would be conscious. But, while the
words (general-scientific) and goal was given at the outset, the child
turned over specific blocks (everyday) and is asked to generalize and the
experimenter turns over another block which either proves the hypotheses
correct or wrong. As the experiment continues the child is able to
generalize all tall blocks (no matter shape, size, color) are called by one
name. If the concept truly developed the child will be able to determine
(x) tall blocks) to other objects not in the experiment. If we take
"double stimulation" as a model in which to understand concept development
it seems it is truly dialectical because the everyday concept was embedded
within the formation of the scientific one.
Nate