Thank you for the interest Mike:
Why is it that you make a distinction between action and activity?
My main reference is Valsiner's "Developemental Psychology in the Soviet
Union". I like the word action because in most of the experiments that
utilize the dual stimulation method there is an expectation set by the
experimentor that the subject is to bring action to the experiment by
actively achieving a goal as well the action utilized by the experimentor
in directing the goal. For example, the "forbidden color" experiment, the
card is both a semiotic psychological tool used by the subject as well as a
culturally mediated tool that allows the experimentor to set the parameters
of the experiment.
What do you see as the main difference between the Skinner/Pavlov
experiment and the Vygotsky/Leontiev/Luria experiment?
eric
"Mike Cole"
<lchcmike who-is-at gmail. To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: [xmca] action based research
xmca-bounces who-is-at web
er.ucsd.edu
12/01/2006 02:08
PM
Please respond
to mcole; Please
respond to
"eXtended Mind,
Culture,
Activity"
What references are you using to chactertize the Kharkhov School, Eric? Why
action when it is there that activity came to the fore as a central
concept?
mike
On 12/1/06, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> I believe there is a distinct difference between the Cartesian dualism of
> the subject-object psychological experimentation and the action based
> research of the 'Kharkov School'. In the action based psychological
> experiment the emphasis is upon goal orientated social behavior.
> Therefore, I believe it is this focus on the social otherness that sets
> apart the action based research. This otherness at some point becomes a
> tool for a person to utilize to further their own development. That I
> believe is the kernel, the nut, the essence of what needs to be answered.
> At what point in development does a person realize that the otherness can
> be a tool to further their own development?
>
> In action based research there is not the sterile confines of a
laboratory
> but rather 'experiments' can be conducted anywhere as long as the goal
> being attained is clearly defined. The empirical evidence gathered from
> these action based experiments gleaned information for researchers to
> place
> great emphasis upon semiosis. However, this still anchors a person's
> thinking within the materialistic realm of subject-object but I believe
it
> to be a different anchoring than what results from mere
> antecedent-behavior
> associations. Besides being associative and quantitative in nature the
> results of an action oriented empirical experiment provides qualitative
> evidence towards answering the question posed in the above paragraph.
>
> what do others think?
>
> eric
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 03 2007 - 07:06:17 PST