Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Introduction
- Part I Theoretical and Methodological Issues
- Part II Action, Objects, Artifacts, and Meaning
- 6 Spirited Psyche Creates Artifacts: Semiotic Dynamics of Experience in the Shaping of Objects, Agency, and Intentional Worlds
- 7 Making Social Objects: The Theory of Social Representation
- 8 Beyond the Distinction between Tool and Sign: Objects and Artifacts in Human Activity
- 9 The Sociocultural Study of Creative Action
- 10 Symbolic Resources and Imagination in the Dynamics of Life
- Part III The Agent Rises a Reflective Self: Education and Development
- Part IV Institutional Artifacts for Value
- Part V Aesthetic and Religious Experiences
- Part VI Practices and Artifacts for Imagining Identity
- Part VII Experiences Make the Person
- General Conclusion
- Index
- References
8 - Beyond the Distinction between Tool and Sign: Objects and Artifacts in Human Activity
from Part II - Action, Objects, Artifacts, and Meaning
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 June 2018
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Introduction
- Part I Theoretical and Methodological Issues
- Part II Action, Objects, Artifacts, and Meaning
- 6 Spirited Psyche Creates Artifacts: Semiotic Dynamics of Experience in the Shaping of Objects, Agency, and Intentional Worlds
- 7 Making Social Objects: The Theory of Social Representation
- 8 Beyond the Distinction between Tool and Sign: Objects and Artifacts in Human Activity
- 9 The Sociocultural Study of Creative Action
- 10 Symbolic Resources and Imagination in the Dynamics of Life
- Part III The Agent Rises a Reflective Self: Education and Development
- Part IV Institutional Artifacts for Value
- Part V Aesthetic and Religious Experiences
- Part VI Practices and Artifacts for Imagining Identity
- Part VII Experiences Make the Person
- General Conclusion
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology , pp. 148 - 162Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Argyris, C. & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Arievich, I. & Stetsenko, A. (2014). The “magic of signs”: Developmental trajectory of cultural mediation. In Yasnitsky, A., van der Veer, R., & Ferrari, M. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cultural-Historical Psychology (pp. 217–244). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bakhurst, D. (1991). Consciousness and Revolution in Soviet Philosophy: From Bolsheviks to Evald Ilyenkov. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boujut, J.-F. & Blanco, E. (2003). Intermediary objects as a means to foster co-operation in engineering design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 12: 205–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1938/1991). The Later Works of John Dewey, 1925–1953. Volume 12: Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (ed. by Boydston, Jo Ann). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Elkonin, D. B. (2005). Theories of play. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 43(2), 3–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by Expanding: An Activity Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Helsinki: Orienta Konsultit.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1990). Constructing the object in the work activity of primary care physicians. In Engeström, Y. (Ed.), Learning, Working and Imagining (pp. 107–129). Helsinki: Orienta Konsultit.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2005). From individual action to collective activity and back: Developmental work research as an interventionist methodology. In Engeström, Y., Developmental Work Research: Expanding Activity Theory in Practice (pp. 171–199). Berlin, Lehmanns Media.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2007). Enriching the theory of expansive learning: Lessons from the journeys toward coconfiguration. Mind, Culture and Activity, 14(1–2), 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2008). From Teams to Knots: Activity-theoretical Studies of Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. & Blackler, F. (2005). On the Life of the Object. Organization, 12(3), 307–330.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. & Engeström, R. (1986). Developmental work research: The approach and an application in cleaning work. Nordisk Pedagogik, 6(1), 2–15.Google Scholar
Ewenstein, B. & Whyte, J. (2009). Knowledge practices in design: The role of visual representations as “epistemic objects.” Organization Studies, 30(1), 7–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleck, J. (1994). Learning by trying: The implementation of configurational technology. Research Policy, 23, 637–652.Google Scholar
Gal, U., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2008). The dynamics of IT boundary objects, information infrastructures, and organizational identities: The introduction of 3D modelling technologies into architecture, engineering, and construction industry. European Journal of Information Systems, 17, 290–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489–1522.Google Scholar
Hanseth, O. & Lyytinen, K. (2010). Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: The case of building Internet. Journal of Information Technology, 25(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Henderson, K. (1999). On Line and on Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture, and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Henfridsson, O. & Bygstad, B. (2014). The generative mechanisms of digital infrastructure evolution. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 907–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobday, M. (1998). Product complexity, innovation and industrial organization. Research Policy, 26(6), 689–710.Google Scholar
Houkes, W. & Vermaas, P. E. (2004). Actions versus functions: A plea for an alternative metaphysics of artefacts. The Monist, 87(1), 52–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyysalo, S. (2005). Objects and motives in a product design process. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilyenkov, E. V. (1977a). Dialectical Logic: Essays on Its History and Theory. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Ilyenkov, E. V. (1977b). The concept of the ideal. In Philosophy in the USSR: Problems of Dialectical Materialism (pp. 71–99). Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Kallinikos, J., Aaltonen, A., & Marton, A. (2010). A theory of digital objects. First Monday, 15(6).Google Scholar
Kaptelinin, V. (2005). The object of activity: Making sense of the sense-maker. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 4–18.Google Scholar
Kaptelinin, V. & Nardi, B. A. (2006). Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Karpov, Y. V. (2005). The Neo-Vygotskian Approach to Child Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knorr-Cetina, K. (2001) Objectual practice. In Schatzki, T., Knorr-Cetina, K., & von Savigny, E. (Eds.), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory (pp. 175–188). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1992). One turn after the social turn. In McMullin, E. (Ed.), The Social Dimensions of Science (pp. 272–294). Notre Dame, IN: University of Note Dame Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1994). On technical mediation: Philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29–64.Google Scholar
Leiman, M. (1999). The concept of sign in the work of Vygotsky, Winnicot and Bakhtin: Further integration of object relations theory and activity theory. In Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R-L. (Eds.), Perspectives of Activity Theory (pp. 419–443). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lektorsky, V. A. (1999). Historical change of the notion of activity. In Chaiklin, S., Hedegaard, M., & Juul-Jensen, U. (Eds.), Activity Theory and Social Practice: Cultural-historical Approaches (pp. 104–113). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
Leontiev, A. N. (1977) Activity and consciousness. In Philosophy in the USSR: Problems of Dialectical Materialism. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, Consciousness and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Mampe, B., Friederici, A., Chistophe, A., & Wermke, K. (2009). Newborns’ cry melody is shaped by their native language. Current Biology, 19(23), 1994–1997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, D. & Peim, N. (2009). Editorial: Critical perspectives on activity theory. Educational Review, 61(2), 131–138.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1964). The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 (ed. by Struik), K. J.. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Miettinen, R. (1998). Object construction and networks in research work: The case of research on cellulose-degrading enzymes. Social Studies of Science, 28(3), 423–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miettinen, R. (1999). The riddle of things: Activity theory and actor network theory as approaches of studying innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(3), 170–195.Google Scholar
Miettinen, R. & Paavola, S. (2014). Beyond the BIM utopia: Approaches to the development and implementation of building information modeling. Automation in Construction, 43, 84–91.Google Scholar
Miettinen, R. & Virkkunen, J. (2005). Epistemic objects, artefacts and organizational change. Organization, 12(3), 437–456.Google Scholar
Miller, R. (2011). Vygotsky in Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mind, Culture and Activity (2005). 12(1). Perspectives on the object of activity (special issue).Google Scholar
Nardi, B. A. (2005). Objects of desire: Power and passion in collaborative activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 37–51.Google Scholar
Norman, D. A. (2002). The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books. (Originally published in 1988 as The Psychology of Everyday Things.)Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2007). Developing a method for analyzing institutional change. Working Papers 07–1. Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1998). The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings. Volume 2 (1893–1913). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Preston, B. (1998). Why is a wing like a spoon? A pluralist theory of function. The Journal of Philosophy, 95(5), 215–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Star, S. L. & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.Google Scholar
Teräs, M. (2015). Inter-professional working and learning: Instructional actions and boundary crossing or boundary making in oral healthcare. Journal of Education and Work, 29(5), 614–636.Google Scholar
Teräs, M. & Nuutinen, E. (2010). Ammattikorkeakoulu-ja yliopisto-opiskelijat oppimassa työtä yhdessä [Polytechnic and university students are learning to work together]. Ammattikasvatuksen aikakauskirja [The Finnish journal of vocational and professional education], 12(2), 55–67.Google Scholar
Vinck, D. (2011). Taking intermediary objects and equipping work into account in the study of engineering practices. Engineering Studies, 3(1), 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Mental Functions (ed. by Cole, Michael, John-Steiner, Vera, Scribner, Sylvia and Soberman, Ellen). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). Instrumental method in psychology. In Wersch, J. V. (Ed.), The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology (pp. 134–143). Armonko, NY: Sharp.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. & Luria, A. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (Eds.), The Vygotsky Reader (pp. 99–174). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wartofsky, M. (1979). Models: Representation and Scientific Understanding. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Introduction. In Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.), Culture, Communication and Cognition (pp. 1–20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Whyte, J. & Lobo, S. (2010). Coordination and control in project-based work: Digital objects and infrastructures for delivery. Construction Management and Economics, 28(6), 557–567.Google Scholar
- 3
- Cited by