Abbott, Andrew. 1995. “Things of boundaries.” Social Research 62:857–82Google Scholar

Abbott, Andrew. 1996. “Mechanisms and relations.” In: Conference on Social Mechanisms. Stockholm, Sweden

Ablowitz, Reuben. 1939. “The theory of emergence.” Philosophy of Science 6:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adami, Christoph, Belew, Richard K., Kitano, Hiroaki, and Taylor, Charles, eds. 1998. Artificial life VI: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Life. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Agre, Philip E. 1995. “Computational research on interaction and agency.” In: Computational theories of interaction and agency, edited by Agre, Philip E. and Rosenschein, Stanley J. (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Agre, Philip E., and David Chapman. 1987. “Pengi: An implementation of a theory of activity.” In: Proceedings of the 6th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-97) (pp. 268–72). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann

Agre, Philip E., and Rosenschein, Stanley J., eds. 1995. Computational theories of interaction and agency. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Alexander, Samuel. 1920. Space, time, and deity. London: MacMillan. (Originally presented as the Gifford Lectures at Glasgow, 1916–18.)Google Scholar

Alexander, Jeffrey C. 1982. Theoretical logic in sociology. Vol. 2, The antinomies of classical thought: Marx and Durkheim. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Alexander, Jeffrey C., and Bernhard Giesen. 1987. “From reduction to linkage: The long view of the micro-macro link.” In: The micro-macro link, edited by Alexander, Jeffrey C., Giesen, Bernhard, Münch, Richard, and Smelser, Neil J. (pp. 1–42). Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Alexander, Jeffrey C., and Paul Colomy. 1990. “Neofunctionalism today: Reconstructing a theoretical tradition.” Pp. 33–67 in Frontiers of social theory: The new syntheses, edited by Ritzer, George. New York: Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar

Alexander, Jeffrey C., Giesen, Bernhard, Münch, Richard, and Smelser, Neil J., eds. 1987. The micro-macro link. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Allen, P. M., Sanglier, M., Engelen, G., and Boon, F.. 1985. “Towards a new synthesis in the modeling of evolving complex systems.” Environment and Planning B 12:65–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, Peter B⊘gh, Emmeche, Claus, Finnemann, Niels Ole, and Christiansen, Peder Voetmann, eds. 2000. Downward causation: Minds, bodies and matter. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University PressGoogle Scholar

Antona, M., F. Bousquet, C. LePage, J. Weber, A. Karsenty, and P. Guizol. 1998. “Economic theory of renewable resource management: A multi-agent system approach.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 61–78). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Margaret S. 1979. Social origins of educational systems. Beverly Hills, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Archer, Margaret S. 1982. “Morphogenesis versus structuration: On combining structure and action.” British Journal of Sociology 33:455–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Margaret S. 1988. Culture and agency: The place of culture in social theory. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Archer, Margaret S. 1995. Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Margaret S. 2000. “For structure: Its reality, properties and powers: A reply to Anthony King.” Sociological Review 48:464–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Margaret S. 2003. Structure, agency and the internal conversation. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arrow, Kenneth. 1951. Social choice and individual values. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

Arrow, Kenneth J. 1994. “Methodological individualism and social knowledge.” American Economic Review 84:1–9. Originally presented as the Richard T. Ely Lecture at the American Economics Association, Boston, January 3–5, 1994Google Scholar

Arthur, W. Brian. 1999. “Complexity and the economy.” Science 284:107–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Axelrod, Robert. 1995. “A model of the emergence of new political actors.” In: Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life, edited by Gilbert, Nigel and Conte, Rosaria (pp. 19–39). London: University College London PressGoogle Scholar

Axelrod, Robert. 1997. The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Axtell, Robert L. 2001. “Effects of interaction topology and activation regime in several multi-agent systems.” Pp. 33–48 in Multi-agent-based simulation, edited by Moss, S. and Davidsson, P.. Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Axtell, Robert L. 2002. “A positive theory of emergence for multi-agent systems.” Paper presented at the First Lake Arrowhead Conference on Computational Social Science and Social Complexity, May 9–12, Lake Arrowhead, CA

Axtell, Robert L., and Joshua M. Epstein. 1999. “Coordination in transient social networks: An agent-based computational model of the timing of retirement.” In: Behavioral dimensions of retirement economics, edited by Aaron, Henry J. (pp. 161–83). New York: Russell Sage FoundationGoogle Scholar

Ayala, Francisco J. 1974. “Introduction.” In Studies in the philosophy of biology: Reduction and related problems, edited by Ayala, Francisco Jose and Dobzhansky, Theodosius (pp. ⅶ–ⅹⅵ). Berkeley: University of California PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baas, Nils A. 1994. “Emergence, hierarchies, and hyperstructures.” In: Artificial life III (SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity no. 17), edited by Langton, Christopher G. (pp. 515–37). Reading, MA: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar

Bailey, Kenneth D. 1994. Sociology and the new systems theory: Toward a theoretical synthesis. Albany, NY: SUNY PressGoogle Scholar

Baker, Patrick L. 1993. “Chaos, order, and sociological theory.” Sociological Inquiry 63:123–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bales, Robert F. 1950. Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley PressGoogle Scholar

Batterman, Robert W. 2000. “Multiple realizability and universality.” British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 51:115–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bauman, Zygmunt. 1973. Culture as praxis. London: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar

Bechtel, William, and Abrahamson, Adele. 1991. Connectionism and the mind: An introduction to parallel processing in networks. Cambridge, MA: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Bechtel, William, and Richardson, Robert C.. 1993. Discovering complexity: Decomposition and localization as strategies in scientific research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Beckermann, Ansgar, Flohr, Hans, and Kim, Jaegwon, eds. 1992. Emergence or reduction? Essays on the prospects of nonreductive physicalism. Berlin: de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bedau, Mark. 2002. “Downward causation and the autonomy of weak emergence.” Principia 6:5–50Google Scholar

Bell, Daniel. 1973. The coming of the post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Berger, Peter L., and Luckmann, Thomas. 1966. The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: DoubledayGoogle Scholar

Berger, Peter, and Pullberg, Stanley. 1965. “Reification and the sociological critique of consciousness.” History and Theory 4:196–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergson, Henri. [1907] 1911. Creative evolution. New York: Henry Holt. Originally published as L'évolution créatrice (Paris: F. Alcan, 1907)Google Scholar

Bertalanffy, Ludwig. 1968. General systems theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: G. BrazillerGoogle Scholar

Berthelot, Jean-Michel. 1995. 1895 Durkheim: L'Avénement de la sociologie scientifique. Toulouse, France: Presses Universitaires du MirailGoogle Scholar

Bhargava, Rajeev. 1992. Individualism in social science. New York: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bhaskar, Roy. [1975] 1997. A realist theory of science. New York: Verso ClassicsGoogle Scholar

Bhaskar, Roy. 1979. The possibility of naturalism. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Bhaskar, Roy. 1982. “Emergence, explanation, and emancipation.” In: Explaining human behavior: Consciousness, human action and social structure, edited by Secord, Paul F. (pp. 275–310). Beverly Hills, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Birner, Jack, and Ege, Ragip. 1999. “Two views on social stability: An unsettled question.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 58:749–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Black, Donald. 2000. “Dreams of pure sociology.” Sociological Theory 18:343–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blain, Robert R. 1971. “On Homan's psychological reductionism.” Sociological Inquiry 41:3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1955. The dynamics of bureaucracy: A study of interpersonal relations in two government agencies. Chicago: University of ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1970a. “Comment.” In: Explanation in the behavioural sciences, edited by Borger, Robert and Cioffi, Frank (pp. 329–43). New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1970b. “A formal theory of differentiation in organizations.” American Sociological Review 35:201–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1977. “A macrosociological theory of social structure.” American Journal of Sociology 83:26–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1981. “Introduction: Diverse views of social structure and their common denominator.” In Continuity in structural inquiry, edited by Blau, Peter M. and Merton, Robert K. (pp. 1–23). Beverly Hills: SageGoogle Scholar

Blau, Peter M. 1987. “Microprocess and macrostructure.” In Social exchange theory, edited by Cook, Karen S. (pp. 83–100). Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Blitz, David. 1992. Emergent evolution: Qualitative novelty and the levels of reality. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer AcademicCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blommaert, Jan. 2001. “Context is/as critique.” Critique of Anthropology 21:13–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blume, Lawrence E., and Steven N. Durlauf. 2001. “The interactions-based approach to socioeconomic behavior.” In: Social dynamics, edited by Durlauf, Steven N. and Young, H. Peyton (pp. 15–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Blumer, Herbert. 1939. “Collective behavior.” In: An outline of the principles of sociology, edited by Park, Robert E. (pp. 219–80). New York: Barnes and NobleGoogle Scholar

Blumer, Herbert. 1962. “Society as symbolic interaction.” In Human behavior and social processes: An interactionist approach, edited by Rose, Arnold M. (pp. 179–192). Boston: Houghton MifflinGoogle Scholar

Blumer, Herbert. 1966. “Sociological implications of the thought of George Herbert Mead.” American Journal of Sociology 71:535–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar

Boring, E. G. 1929. A history of experimental psychology. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice HallGoogle Scholar

Boulding, Kenneth E. 1969. “Economics as a moral science.” American Economic Review 59:1–12Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre. [1972] 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. New York: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. Originally published as Esquisse d'une théorie de la pratique (Geneva: Droz, 1972)Google Scholar

Boutroux, Émile. [1874] 1916. The contingency of the laws of nature. Chicago: Open Court. Originally published as a dissertation at the Sorbonne in 1874, titled De la Contingence des Lois de la NatureGoogle Scholar

Boutroux, Émile. [1893] 1914. Natural law in science and philosophy. New York: Macmillan. From lectures presented at the Sorbonne 1892–1893Google Scholar

Bowles, Samuel. 2001. “Comment: Individual behavior and social interactions.” Sociological Methodology 31:89–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brassel, Kai-H., Michael Möhring, Elke Schumacher, and Klaus G. Troitzsch. 1997. “Can agents cover all the world?” In: Simulating social phenomena, edited by Conte, Rosaria, Hegselmann, Rainer, and Terna, Pietro (pp. 55–72). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bratman, Michael E. 1992. “Shared cooperative activity.” Philosophical Review 101:327–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brenneis, D. 1984. “Grog and gossip in Bhatgaon: Style and substance in Fiji Indian conversation.” American Ethnologist 11:487–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Breton, Laurent, Jean-Daniel Zucker, and Eric Cl'ement. 2001. “A multi-agent based simulation of sand piles in a static equilibrium.” Pp. 108–118. In Multi-agent-based simulation, edited by Moss, S. and Davidsson, P.. Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Broad, C. D. 1925. The mind and its place in nature. New York: Harcourt, BraceGoogle Scholar

Brock, William A., and Durlauf, Steven N.. 2001. “Discrete choice with social interactions.” Review of Economic Studies 68:235–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brodbeck, May. [1958] 1968. “Methodological individualisms: Definition and reduction.” In: Readings in the philosophy of the social sciences, edited by May Brodbeck (pp. 280–303). New York: Macmillan. Originally published in Philosophy of Science 25 (1958):1–22

Brooks, Rodney A., and Maes, Pattie, eds. 1994. Artificial life IV: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. 1978. “Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena.” In: Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction, edited by Goody, Esther N. (pp. 56–289). New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Bruner, Jerome. 1990. Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Buckley, Walter. 1967. Sociology and modern systems theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar

Bunge, Mario. 1977. “Commentary: Emergence and the mind.” Neuroscience 2:501–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bunge, Mario. 1996. Finding philosophy in social science. New Haven, CT: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar

Bunge, Mario. 1997. “Mechanism and explanation.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 27:410–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bunge, Mario. 2004. “How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34:182–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burke, Peter J. 1997. “An identity model for network exchange.” American Sociological Review 62:134–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burt, Ronald S. 1982. Toward a structural theory of action: Network models of social structure, perception, and action. New York: Academic PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Byrne, David. 1998. Complexity theory and the social sciences: An introduction. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Campbell, Donald T. 1974. “‘Downward causation’ in hierarchically organised biological systems.” In: Studies in the philosophy of biology: Reduction and related problems, edited by Ayala, Francisco Jose and Dobzhansky, Theodosius (pp. 179–86). Berkeley: University of California PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carelli, Maria Grazia. 1998. “Internalization, participation, and ethnocentrism.” Human Development 41:355–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cariani, Peter. 1991. “Emergence and artificial life.” In: Artificial life II (SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity no. 10), edited by Langton, C. G., Taylor, C., Farmer, J. D., and Rasmussen, S. (pp. 775–97). Reading, MA: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar

Carley, Kathleen M., and Les Gasser. 1999. “Computational organization theory.” In: Multiagent systems: A modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence, edited by Weiss, Gerhard (pp. 299–330). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Carley, Kathleen M., and Prietula, Michael J., eds. 1994. Computational organization theory. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Castelfranchi, Cristiano. 1998. “Simulating with cognitive agents: The importance of cognitive emergence.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 26–44). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Castelfranchi, Cristiano. 2001. “The theory of social functions: Challenges for computational social science and multi-agent learning.” Cognitive Systems Research 2:5–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Castelfranchi, Cristiano, and Rosaria Conte. 1996. “Distributed artificial intelligence and social science: Critical issues.” In: Foundations of distributed artificial intelligence, edited by O'Hare, G. M. P. and Jennings, N. R. (pp. 527–42). New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

Casti, John L. 1994. Complexification: Explaining a paradoxical world through the science of surprise. New York: HarperCollinsGoogle Scholar

Cederman, Lars Erik. 1997. Emergent actors in world politics: How states and nations develop. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Cederman, Lars Erik. 2002. “Computational models of social forms: Advancing generative macro theory.” Paper presented at Agent 2002: Social Agents: Ecology, Exchange, and Evolution, Chicago

Chapman, David. 1987. “Planning for conjunctive goals.” Artificial Intelligence 32:333–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chwe, Michael Suk-Young. 1999. “Structure and strategy in collective action.” American Journal of Sociology 105:128–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cilliers, Paul. 1998. Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Clark, Andy. 1997. Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Clark, Terry N. 1969. “Introduction.” In: On communication and social influence, edited by Clark, Terry N. (pp. 1–69). Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Clarke, R. 1999. “Nonreductive physicalism and the causal powers of the mental.” Erkenntnis 51:295–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, Ira J. 1989. Structuration theory: Anthony Giddens and the constitution of social life. New York: St. Martin's PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, Philip R., and Levesque, Hector J.. 1991. “Teamwork.” NoÛs 35:487–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, Philip R., Morgan, Jerry, and Pollack, Martha E., eds. 1990. Intentions in communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Cole, Michael. 1995a. “Socio-cultural-historical psychology: Some general remarks and a proposal for a new kind of cultural-genetic methodology.” In: Sociocultural studies of mind, edited by Wertsch, James V., Rio, Pablo del, and Alvarez, Amelia (pp. 187–214). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cole, Michael. 1995b. “The supra-individual envelope of development: Activity and practice, situation and context.” In: Cultural practices as contexts for development, edited by Goodnow, Jacqueline J., Miller, Peggy J., and Kessel, Frank (pp. 105–18). San Francisco: Jossey-BassGoogle Scholar

Cole, Michael. 1996. Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Cole, Michael, and Sylvia Scribner. 1978. “Introduction.” In: Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, edited by Cole, Michael, John-Steiner, Vera, Scribner, Sylvia, and Souberman, Ellen (pp. 1–14). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Coleman, James S. 1986. “Social theory, social research, and a theory of action.” American Journal of Sociology 91:1309–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coleman, James S. 1987. “Microfoundations and macrosocial behavior.” In: The micro-macro link, edited by Alexander, Jeffrey C., Giesen, Bernhard, Münch, Richard, and Smelser, Neil J. (pp. 153–73). Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Coleman, James S. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Collier, Andrew. 1989. Scientific realism and socialist thought. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner PublishersGoogle Scholar

Collins, Randall. 1981. “On the microfoundations of macrosociology.” American Journal of Sociology 86:984–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comte, Auguste. [1842] 1854. The positive philosophy of Auguste Comte. New York: D. Appleton. Originally published in French in six volumes, from 1830 to 1842Google Scholar

Comte, Auguste. [1854] 1966. System of positive polity. New York: B. Franklin. Originally published in French in four volumes, from 1851 to 1854Google Scholar

Connah, David, and Peter Wavish. 1990. “An experiment in cooperation.” In: Decentralized A. I.: Proceedings of the First European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, edited by Demazeau, Yves and Müller, Jean-Pierre (pp. 197–212). New York: ElsevierGoogle Scholar

Conte, Rosaria, and Cristiano Castelfranchi. 1995. “Understanding the functions of norms in social groups through simulation.” In: Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life, edited by Gilbert, Nigel and Conte, Rosaria (pp. 252–67). London: University College London PressGoogle Scholar

Conte, Rosaria, and Cristiano Castelfranchi. 1996. “Simulating multi-agent interdependencies: A two-way approach to the micro-macro link.” In: Social science microsimulation, edited by Troitzsch, Klaus G., Mueller, Ulrich, Gilbert, G. Nigel, and Doran, Jim E. (pp. 394–415). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Conte, Rosaria, Edmonds, Bruce, Moss, Scott, and Sawyer, R. Keith. 2001. “Sociology and social theory in agent based social simulation: A symposium.” Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory 7:183–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Conte, Rosaria, Nigel Gilbert, and Jaime Samoa Sichman. 1998. “MAS and social simulation: A suitable commitment.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 1–9). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Conte, Rosaria, Hegselmann, Rainer, and Terna, Pietro, eds. 1997. Simulating social phenomena. New York: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Contractor, Noshir, Robert Whitbred, Fabio Fonti, Andrew Hyatt, Barbara O'Keefe, and Patricia Jones. 2005. “Structuration theory and the evolution of networks.” Unpublished manuscript

Cook, Karen S., ed. 1987. Social exchange theory. Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Cook, K. S., and Whitmeyer, J. M.. 1992. “Two approaches to social structure: Exchange theory and network analysis.” Annual Review of Sociology 18:109–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooley, Charles Horton. 1902. Human nature and the social order. New York: Charles Scribner's SonsGoogle Scholar

Corsaro, William A. 1985. Friendship and peer culture in the early years. Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar

Cottrell, Alan. 1978. “Emergent properties of complex systems.” In: The encyclopaedia of ignorance: Everything you ever wanted to know about the unknown, edited by Duncan, Ronald and Weston-Smith, Miranda (pp. 129–35). New York: Pocket BooksGoogle Scholar

Cox, S. J., Sluckin, T. J., and Steele, J.. 1999. “Group size, memory, and interaction rate in the evolution of cooperation.” Current Anthropology 40:369–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craib, Ian. 1992. Anthony Giddens. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Crutchfield, James P. 1994. “The calculi of emergence: Computation, dynamics, and induction.” Physica D 75:11–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cunningham, Bryon. 2001. “The reemergence of “emergence”.” Philosophy of Science 68 (Proceedings):S62–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Currie, Gregory. 1984. “Individualism and Global Supervenience.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35:345–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cyert, Richard M., and James G. March. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Darley, Vince. 1994. “Emergent phenomena and complexity.” In: Artificial life IV: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems, edited by Brooks, Rodney A. and Maes, Pattie (pp. 411–16). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Davidson, Donald. 1970. “Mental events.” In: Experience and theory, edited by Foster, Lawrence and Swanson, J. W. (pp. 79–101). Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts PressGoogle Scholar

Davidson, Donald. 1993. “Thinking causes.” In: Mental causation, edited by Heil, John and Mele, Alfred (pp. 3–17). Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Deutsch, Morton. 1954. “Field theory in social psychology.” In: Handbook of social psychology, edited by Lindzey, Gardner (pp. 181–222). Cambridge, MA: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar

Dewey, John. 1934. Art as experience. New York: Perigree BooksGoogle Scholar

Dignum, Frank, Dunin-Keplicz, Barbara, and Verbrugge, Rineke. 2001. “Creating collective intention through dialogue.” Logic Journal of the IGPL 9:289–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dignum, F., D. Morley, E. A. Sonenberg, and L. Cavedon. 2000. “Towards socially sophisticated BDI agents.” In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Multiagent Systems (ICMAS 2000; pp. 111–18). Boston: IEEE Computer Society

DiPrete, Thomas A., and Forristal, Jerry D.. 1994. “Multilevel models: Methods and substance.” Annual Review of Sociology 20:331–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar

DiTomaso, Nancy. 1982. “‘Sociological reductionism’ from Parsons to Althusser: Linking action and structure in social theory.” American Sociological Review 47:14–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Domingues, José Maurício. 1995. Sociological theory and collective subjectivity. New York: St. Martin's Press

Doran, Jim, and Mike Palmer. 1995. “The EOS project: Integrating two models of Palaeolithic social change.” In: Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life, edited by Gilbert, Nigel and Conte, Rosaria (pp. 103–25). London: University College London PressGoogle Scholar

Drogoul, Alexis, Bruno Corbara, and Steffen Lalande. 1995. “MANTA: New experimental results on the emergence of (artificial) ant societies.” In: Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life, edited by Gilbert, Nigel and Conte, Rosaria (pp. 190–211). London: University College London PressGoogle Scholar

Duranti, Alessandro. 1997. Linguistic anthropology. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duranti, Alessandro, and Goodwin, Charles, eds. 1992. Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1893] 1984. The division of labor in society. New York: The Free Press. Originally published as De la division du travail social: étude sur l'organisation des sociétés supérieures (Paris: Alcan, 1893)Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1895] 1964. The rules of sociological method. New York: The Free Press. Originally published as Les règles de la méthode sociologique (Paris: Alcan, 1895)Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1897] 1951. Suicide. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. Originally published as Le Suicide: Etude de sociologie (Paris: Alcan, 1897)Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1898–1899] 1960. “Prefaces to L'Année Sociologique.” In: Emile Durkheim, 1858–1917, edited by Wolff, Kurt H. (pp. 341–53). Columbus: Ohio State University PressGoogle Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1898] 1953. “Individual and collective representations.” In: Sociology and philosophy (pp. 1–34). Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. Originally published in Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale 6 (1898)

Durkheim, Émile. [1900] 1960. “Sociology and its scientific field.” In: Emile Durkheim, 1858–1917, edited by Wolff, Kurt H. (pp. 354–75). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University PressGoogle Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1901] 1964. “Author's preface to the second edition.” In: The rules of sociological method (pp. ⅹⅼⅰ–ⅼⅹ). New York: The Free Press. Originally published as “De la mèthode objective en sociologie,” Revue de synthese historique, 2, 1901, 3–17

Durkheim, Émile. [1903] 1982. “Sociology and the social sciences.” In: The rules of sociological method, edited by Lukes, Steven (pp. 175–208). New York: The Free Press Originally published, with Paul Fauconnet, as “Sociologie et sciences sociales,” Revue philosophique 55 (1903):465–97Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1907] 1982. “Letter to the director.” In: The rules of sociological method, edited by Lukes, Steven (pp. 258–60). New York: The Free Press. Originally published in Revue neo-scolastique (Louvain), 14 (1907): 612–14Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. 1909–1912. “Review of Simon Deploige, Le conflit de la morale et de la sociologie.” L'Année Sociologique 12:326–8Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1912] 1915. The elementary forms of the religious life. New York: The Free Press. Originally published as Les Formes élèmentaires de la vie religieuse: le système totèmique en Australie (Paris: Alcan, 1912)Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. [1914] 1960. “The dualism of human nature and its social conditions.” In: Emile Durkheim, 1858–1917, edited by Wolff, Kurt H. (pp. 325–40). Columbus: Ohio State University PressGoogle Scholar

Durlauf, Steven N. 2001. “A framework for the study of individual behavior and social interactions.” Sociological Methodology 31:47–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Durlauf, Steven N., and H. Peyton Young. 2001. “The new social economics.” In: Social dynamics, edited by Durlauf, Steven N. and Young, H. Peyton (pp. 1–14). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Edel, Abraham. 1959. “The concept of levels in social theory.” In: Symposium on social theory, edited by Gross, Lllewellyn (pp. 167–95). Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson and Co.Google Scholar

Ellis, Donald G. 1999. “Research on social interaction and the micro-macro issue.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 32:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Elman, Jeffrey L., Bates, Elizabeth A., Johnson, Mark H., Karmiloff-Smith, Annette, Parisi, Domenico, and Plunkett, Kim. 1996. Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Elster, Jon. 1985. Making sense of Marx. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Elster, Jon. 1989. Nuts and bolts for the social sciences. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Elster, Jon. 1998. “A plea for mechanism.” In: Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory, edited by Hedström, Peter and Swedberg, Richard (pp. 45–73). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Emerson, Richard M. 1972. “Exchange theory.” In: Sociological theories in progress, vol. 2, edited by Berger, J. Jr., Zelditch, M., and Anderson, B. (pp. 38–87). Boston: Houghton MifflinGoogle Scholar

Epstein, Joshua M., and Axtell, Robert. 1996. Growing artificial societies: Social science from the bottom up. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Etzioni, Amitai. 1991. “Socio-economics: A budding challenge.” In: Socio-economics: Toward a new synthesis, edited by Etzioni, Amitai and Lawrence, Paul R. (pp. 3–7). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, Inc.Google Scholar

Evans, Robert R., ed. 1969. Readings in collective behavior. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co.Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. New York: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Fararo, Thomas J., and Skvoretz, John. 1986. “E-state structuralism: A theoretical method.” American Sociological Review 51:591–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fenton, Steve. 1984. Durkheim and modern sociology. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Fine, Gary Alan. 1990. “Symbolic interactionism in the post-Blumerian age.” In: Frontiers of social theory: The new syntheses, edited by Ritzer, George (pp. 117–57). New York: Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar

Fitoussi, David, and Tennenholtz, Moshe. 2000. “Choosing social laws for multi-agent systems: Minimality and simplicity.” Artificial Intelligence 119:61–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fodor, Jerry A. 1974. “Special sciences (Or: The disunity of science as a working hypothesis).” Synthese 28:97–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fodor, Jerry A. 1989. “Making mind matter more.” Philosophical Topics 17:59–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fodor, Jerry A. 1997. “Special sciences: Still autonomous after all these years.” Philosophical Perspectives 11:149–63Google Scholar

Forman, Ellice A., Minick, Norris, and Stone, C. Addison, eds. 1993. Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Forrester, Jay W. 1968. Principles of systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Forrester, Jay W. 1971. World dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Wright-AllenGoogle Scholar

Foucault, Michel. [1969] 1972. The archeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon Books. Originally published as L'Archéologie du Savoir (Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1969)Google Scholar

Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents. 1999. “FIPA communicative act library specification.” Available on-line at http://www.fipa.org/specs/fipa00037/SC00037J.pdf

Frey, Lawrence R., ed. 1994. Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Friedrich, P. 1971. “Structural implications of Russian pronominal usage.” In: Proceedings of the UCLA Sociolinguistics Conference, 1964, edited by Bright, W. (pp. 214–59). Los Angeles: Center for Research in Languages and LinguisticsGoogle Scholar

Gallagher, Richard, and Appenzeller, Tim. 1999. “Beyond reductionism.” Science 284:79CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gane, Mike. 1988. On Durkheim's rules of sociological method. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar

Gell-Mann, Murray. 1994. The quark and the jaguar: Adventures in the simple and the complex. New York: W. H. FreemanGoogle Scholar

Gellner, Ernest. [1956] 1968. “Holism versus Individualism.” In: Readings in the philosophy of the social sciences, edited by Brodbeck, May (pp. 254–68). New York: Macmillan. Originally published as “Explanations in History,” in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, suppl vol. 30 (1956):157–76Google Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1970. “Durkheim as a review critic.” Sociological Review 18:171–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1977. Studies in social and political theory. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1979a. Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1979b. Emile Durkheim. New York: Viking PressGoogle Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1989. “A reply to my critics.” In: Social theory of modern societies: Anthony Giddens and his critics, edited by Held, David and Thompson, John B. (pp. 249–301). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Margaret. 1989. On social facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel. 1995. “Emergence in social simulations.” In: Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life, edited by Gilbert, Nigel and Conte, Rosaria (pp. 144–56). London: University College London PressGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel. 1997. “A simulation of the structure of academic science.” Sociological Research Online, 2:http://www.socresonline.org.uk//2/2/3.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel. 1999a. “Multi-level simulation in Lisp-Stat.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 2 [online], http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS/2/1/3.htmlGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel. 1999b. “Simulation: A new way of doing social science.” American Behavioral Scientist 42:1485–7Google Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel. 2002. “Varieties of emergence in social simulation.” Pp. 41–50 in Social agents: Ecology, exchange, and evolution, edited by Macal, C. and Sallach, D.. Chicago, IL: Argonne National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel, and Doran, Jim, eds. 1994. Simulating societies: The computer simulation of social phenomena. London: UCL PressGoogle Scholar

Gilbert, Nigel, and Conte, Rosaria, eds. 1995. Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life. London: UCL PressGoogle Scholar

Goldstein, Jeffrey. 1999. “Emergence as a construct: History and issues.” Emergence 1:49–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldstein, Leon J. [1958] 1973. “Two theses of methodological individualism.” In: Modes of individualism and collectivism, edited by O'Neill, John (pp. 277–86). Hampshire, England: Gregg Revivals. Originally published in the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 9 (1958):1–11Google Scholar

Granovetter, Mark. 1985. “Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.” American Journal of Sociology 91:481–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Granovetter, Mark. 1990. “The old and the new economic sociology: A history and an agenda.” In: Beyond the marketplace: Rethinking economy and society, edited by Friedland, Roger and Robertson, A. F. (pp. 89–112). New York: Aldine de GruyterGoogle Scholar

Granovetter, Mark, and Swedberg, Richard, eds. 1992. The sociology of economic life. Boulder, CO: Westview PressGoogle Scholar

Gregson, Nicky. 1989. “On the (ir)relevance of structuration theory to empirical research.” In: Social theory of modern societies: Anthony Giddens and his critics, edited by Held, David and Thompson, John B. (pp. 235–48). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Griffiths, P. E., and Gray, R. D.. 1994. “Developmental systems and evolutionary explanation.” Journal of Philosophy 91:277–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grosz, Barbara J. 1996. “Collaborative systems.” AI Magazine 17:67–85Google Scholar

Grosz, Barbara, and Kraus, Sarit. 1996. “Collaborative plans for complex group actions.” Artificial Intelligence 86:269–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grosz, Barbara J., and Candace Sidner. 1990. “Plans for discourse.” In: Intentions in communication, edited by Cohen, Philip R., Morgan, Jerry, and Pollack, Martha E. (pp. 417–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Habermas, J. 1987. Theory of communicative action. Boston: Beacon PressGoogle Scholar

Hales, David. 1998. “Stereotyping, groups and cultural evolution: A case of ‘second order emergence’?” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 140–55). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halpin, Brendan. 1999. “Simulation in sociology.” American Behavioral Scientist 42:1488–1508Google Scholar

Hanks, William F. 1996. Language and communicative practices. Boulder, CO: Westview PressGoogle Scholar

Hanneman, Robert A. 1988. Computer-assisted theory building: Modeling dynamic social systems. Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Hannoun, Mahdi, Jaime Samoa Sichman, Olivier Boissier, and Claudette Sayettat. 1998. “Dependence relations between roles in a multi-agent system: Towards the detection of inconsistencies in organization.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 169–82). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harvey, David L., and Michael Reed. 1996. “Social science as the study of complex systems.” In: Chaos theory in the social sciences: Foundations and applications, edited by Kiel, L. Douglas and Elliott, Euel (pp. 295–323). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hatano, Giyoo, and Wertsch, James V.. 2001. “Sociocultural approaches to cognitive development: The constitutions of culture in mind.” Human Development 44:77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hawes, Leonard C. 1974. “Social collectivities as communication: Perspective on organizational behavior.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 60:497–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayek, F. A.. 1942. “Scientism and the study of society,” part 1. Economica 9:267–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayek, F. A.. 1943. “Scientism and the study of society,” part 2. Economica 10:34–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayek, F. A.. 1944. “Scientism and the study of society,” part 3. Economica 11:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayes-Roth, Barbara. 1992. “Opportunistic control of action in intelligent agents.” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 23:1575–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayes-Roth, Barbara, Lee Brownston, and Robert van Gent. 1995. “Multiagent collaboration in directed improvisation.” Pp. 148–154 in ICMAS-95, edited by Lesser, Victor. Cambridge: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Hayes-Roth, Barbara, Erik Sincoff, Lee Brownston, Ruth Huard, and Brian Lent. 1995. “Directed improvisation with animated puppets.” in Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'95) (pp. 79–80). New York, NY: ACM Press

Healy, Kieran. 1998. “Conceptualising constraint: Mouzelis, Archer and the concept of social structure.” Sociology 32:509–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hedström, Peter, and Swedberg, Richard, eds. 1998. Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heil, John. 1998. “Supervenience deconstructed.” European Journal of Philosophy 6:146–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heil, John. 1999. “Multiple realizability.” American Philosophical Quarterly 36:189–208Google Scholar

Heil, John, and Mele, Alfred, eds. 1993. Mental causation. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar

Hempel, Carl G. 1965. Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar

Hertz-Lazarowitz, Rachel, and Miller, Norman, eds. 1992. Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Hinkle, Roscoe C. 1960. “Durkheim in American sociology.” In: Essays on sociology and philosophy, edited by Wolff, Kurt H. (pp. 267–95). New York: Harper and RowGoogle Scholar

Hirshleifer, Jack. 1985. “The expanding domain of economics.” American Economic Review 75:53–68Google Scholar

Hobsbawm, Eric, and Ranger, T.. 1983. The invention of tradition. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Holland, John H. 1995. Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Reading, MA: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar

Homans, George C. 1941. English villagers of the thirteenth century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Homans, George C. 1950. The human group. New York: Harcourt, Brace and WorldGoogle Scholar

Homans, George C. 1958. “Social behavior as exchange.” American Journal of Sociology 65:597–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Homans, George C. 1961. Social behavior: Its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and WorldGoogle Scholar

Homans, George C. 1964a. “Commentary.” Sociological Inquiry 34:221–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Homans, George C. 1964b. “Contemporary theory in sociology.” In: Handbook of modern sociology, edited by Harris, Robert E. L. (pp. 951–77). Chicago: Rand McNallyGoogle Scholar

Horgan, Terence. 1989. “Mental quasation.” Philosophical Perspectives 3:47–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horgan, Terence. 1993. “From supervenience to superdupervenience: Meeting the demands of a material world.” Mind 102:555–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horgan, Terence. 1994. “Nonreductive materialism.” In: The mind-body problem: A guide to the current debate, edited by Warner, Richard and Szubka, Tadeusz (pp. 236–41). Cambridge, MA: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Horgan, Terence. 1997. “Kim on mental causation and causal exclusion.” Philosophical Perspectives 11:165–84Google Scholar

Hoyningen-Huene, Paul, and Wuketits, Franz M., eds. 1989. Reductionism and systems theory in the life sciences. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic PublishersCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, Joan. 1991. Macro-micro linkages in sociology. Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Humphreys, Paul. 1997. “How Properties Emerge.” Philosophy of Science 64:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Humphreys, Paul, Rohrlich, Fritz, Rosenberg, Alex, and Wimsatt, William C.. 1997. “Symposium: Emergence and supervenience: Alternatives to unity by reduction.” Philosophy of Science 64:S337–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutchins, Edwin. 1995. Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Irvine, Judith T. 1974. “Strategies of status manipulation in the Wolof greeting.” In: Explorations in the ethnography of speaking, edited by Bauman, R. and Sherzer, J. (pp. 167–91). New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

International Foundation for MultiAgent Systems. 2000. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society

Jackson, Frank, and Philip Pettit. 1992. “Structural explanation in social theory.” In: Reduction, explanation, and realism, edited by Lennon, Kathleen and Charles, David (pp. 97–131). Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar

James, William. 1890. The principles of psychology. New York: Henry HoltGoogle Scholar

Jennings, Nick R. 1993. “Commitments and conventions: The foundation of coordination in multi-agent systems.” Knowledge Engineering Review 8:223–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jennings, Nick R. 1995. “Controlling cooperative problem solving in industrial multi-agent systems using joint intentions.” Artificial Intelligence 75:195–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, Steven. 2001. Emergence: The connected lives of ants, brains, cities, and software. New York: Scribner'sGoogle Scholar

Jones, S. G. Stedman. 1995. “Charles Renouvier and Emile Durkheim: ‘Les Règles de La Méthode Sociologique.’” Sociological Perspectives 38:27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kauffman, Stuart A. 1993a. The origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Kauffman, Stuart A. 1993b. “The sciences of complexity and ‘origins of order.’” In: Creativity: The reality club 4, edited by Brockman, John (pp. 75–107). New York: Simon and SchusterGoogle Scholar

Kauffman, Stuart A. 1995. At home in the universe: The search for laws of self-organization and complexity. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Keat, Russell, and Urry, John. 1975. Social theory as science. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Kennedy, James. 1997. “Minds and cultures: Particle swarm implications.” In: Socially intelligent agents: Papers from the 1997 AAAI fall symposium (pp. 67–72). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press

Kennedy, James, and Eberhart, Russell C.. 2001. Swarm intelligence. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann PublishersGoogle Scholar

Kiel, L. Douglas. 1991. “Lessons from the nonlinear paradigm: Applications of the theory of dissipative structures in the social sciences.” Social Science Quarterly 72:431–42Google Scholar

Kiel, L. Douglas, and Elliott, Euel, eds. 1996. Chaos theory in the social sciences. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, Jaegwon. 1984. “Epiphenomenal and supervenient causation.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 9:257–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, Jaegwon. 1992. “‘Downward causation’ in emergentism and nonreductive physicalism.” In: Emergence or reduction? Essays on the prospects of nonreductive physicalism, edited by Beckermann, Ansgar, Flohr, Hans, and Kim, Jaegwon (pp. 119–38). New York: Walter de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, Jaegwon. 1993a. “The non-reductivist's troubles with mental causation.” In: Mental causation, edited by Heil, John and Mele, Alfred (pp. 189–210). Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar

Kim, Jaegwon. 1993b. Supervenience and mind. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, Jaegwon. 1999. “Making sense of emergence.” Philosophical Studies 95:3–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kincaid, Harold. 1990. “Defending laws in the social sciences.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 20:56–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kincaid, Harold. 1997. Individualism and the unity of science. New York: Rowman and LittlefieldGoogle Scholar

King, Anthony. 1999a. “Against structure: A critique of morphogenetic social theory.” Sociological Review 47:199–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar

King, Anthony. 1999b. “The impossibility of naturalism: The antinomies of Bhaskar's realism.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 29:267–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Knorr-Cetina, Karin D., and Cicourel, Aaron V., eds. 1981. Advances in social theory and methodology: Toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies. Boston: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar

Köhler, Wolfgang. 1929. Gestalt psychology. New York: Horace LiverightGoogle Scholar

Kontopoulos, Kyriakos M. 1993. The logics of social structure. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krier, Dan. 1999. “Assessing the new synthesis of economics and sociology: Promising themes for contemporary analysts of economic life.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 58:669–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krippendorff, Klaus. 1971. “Communication and the genesis of structure.” General Systems 16:171–85Google Scholar

Labrou, Yannis, and Tim Finin. 1997. “Towards a standard for an agent communication language.” In: Working notes of the AAAI fall symposium on communicative actions in humans and machines. Cambridge, MA

Mettrie, Julien Offray. [1748] 1912. Man a machine. Chicago: Open CourtGoogle Scholar

Lang, Kurt, and Lang, Gladys Engel. 1961. Collective dynamics. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co.Google Scholar

Langton, Christopher G., ed. 1994. Artificial life III (Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, proceedings vol. 17). Reading, MA: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar

Latané, Bibb, Nowak, Andrzej, and Liu, James H.. 1994. “Measuring emergent social phenomena: Dynamism, polarization, and clustering as order parameters of social systems.” Behavioral Science 39:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lave, Jean. 1993. “The practice of learning.” In: Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context, edited by Chaiklin, Seth and Lave, Jean (pp. 3–32). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lave, Jean, and Wenger, Etienne. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lavie, Smadar, Narayan, Kirin, and Rosaldo, Renato, eds. 1993. Creativity/anthropology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar

Lawler, Edward J., Ridgeway, Cecilia, and Markovsky, Barry. 1993. “Structural social psychology and the micro-macro problem.” Sociological Theory 11:268–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lawrence, Jeanette A., and Valsiner, Jaan. 1993. “Conceptual roots of internalization: From transmission to transformation.” Human Development 36:150–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lawson, Tony. 1997. Economics and reality. London: RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Layder, Derek. 1981. Structure, interaction and social theory. London: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar

Layder, D. (1985). Power, structure and agency. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 15(2), 131–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Layder, Derek. 1987. “Key issues in structuration theory: Some critical remarks.” Current Perspectives in Social Theory 8:25–46Google Scholar

Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Herbert Menzel. 1969. “On the relation between individual and collective properties.” In: A sociological reader on complex organizations, edited by Etzoni, Amitai (pp. 499–516). New York: Holt, Rinehart and WinstonGoogle Scholar

Bon, Gustave. [1895] 1896. The crowd: A study of the popular mind. London: T. Fisher Unwin Ltd. Originally published as Psychologie des foules (Paris: Alcan, 1895)Google Scholar

Boutillier, Shaun. 2001. “Theorising social constraint: The concept of supervenience.” Sociology 35:159–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lesser, Victor, ed. 1995. ICMAS-95: First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Levesque, Hector J., Philip R. Cohen, and José H. T. Nunes. 1990. “On acting together.” In: Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90; pp. 94–9). Boston: MIT Press

Lévy-Bruhl, Lucien. [1910] 1925. How natives think. New York: Knopf. Originally published as Les fonctions mentales dans les sociétés inférieures (Paris: Alcan, 1910)Google Scholar

Lewes, George Henry. 1853. Comte's philosophy of the sciences: Being an exposition of the principles of the Cours de philosophie positive of Auguste Comte. London: H. G. BohnGoogle Scholar

Lewes, George Henry. 1875. Problems of life and mind. Ser. 1, vol. 2. London: Trubner and Co.Google Scholar

Lewis, Marc D. 2000. “The promise of dynamic systems approaches for an integrated account of human development.” Child Development 71:36–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liska, Allen E. 1990. “The significance of aggregate dependent variables and contextual independent variables for linking macro and micro theories.” Social Psychology Quarterly 53:292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Loar, Brian. 1992. “Elimination versus non-reductive physicalism.” In: Reduction, explanation, and realism, edited by Charles, David and Lennon, Kathleen (pp. 239–63). Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Lomborg, Bjorn. 1992. “Game theory versus multiple agents: The iterated prisoner's dilemma.” In: Artificial social systems, edited by Castelfranchi, Cristiano and Werner, Eric (pp. 69–93). Berlin: Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar

Lomborg, Bjorn. 1996. “Nucleus and shield: The evolution of social structure in the iterated prisoner's dilemma.” American Sociological Review 61:278–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lovejoy, Arthur O. 1927. “The meaning of ‘emergence’ and its modes.” Journal of Philosophical Studies 2:167–89Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. 1993. “The causal autonomy of the mental.” Mind 102:629–44Google Scholar

Loye, David, and Eisler, Riane. 1987. “Chaos and transformation: Implications of nonequilibrium theory for social science and society.” Behavioral Science 32:53–65CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Luhmann, Niklas. [1984] 1995. Social systems: Outline of a general theory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Originally published as Soziale Systeme. Grundreiner allgemeinen Theorie (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1984)Google Scholar

Lukes, Steven. 1973. Emile Durkheim: His life and work. London: PenguinGoogle Scholar

Lukes, Steven. 1982. “Introduction.” In: The rules of sociological method (pp. 1–27). New York: The Free Press

Macdonald, Graham, and Pettit, Philip. 1981. Semantics and social science. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Machlup, Fritz. 1951. “Schumpeter's economic methodology.” Review of Economics and Statistics 33:145–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Macy, Michael W., and Skvoretz, John. 1998. “The evolution of trust and cooperation between strangers: A computational model.” American Sociological Review 63:638–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Macy, Michael W., and Willer, Robert. 2002. “From factors to actors: Computational sociology and agent-based modeling.” Annual Review of Sociology 28:143–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mandelbaum, Maurice. 1951. “A note on emergence.” In: Freedom and reason: Studies in philosophy and Jewish culture, in memory of Morris Ralph Cohen, edited by Baron, Salo W., Nagel, Ernest, and Pinson, Koppel S. (pp. 175–83). Glencoe, IL: The Free PressGoogle Scholar

Mandelbaum, Maurice. 1957. “Societal laws.” British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 8:211–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Margolis, Joseph. 1986. “Emergence.” Philosophical Forum 17:271–95Google Scholar

Marion, Russ. 1999. The edge of organization: Chaos and complexity theories of formal social systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Markovsky, Barry. 1987. “Toward multilevel sociological theories: Simulations of actor and network effects.” Sociological Theory 5:101–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marx, K. 1978. “The German ideology.” In: The Marx-Engels reader, edited by Tucker, R. C. (pp. 146–200). New York: NortonGoogle Scholar

Maturana, Humberto R., and Varela, Francisco J.. 1980. Autopoeisis and cognition: The realization of the living. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science no. 42. Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. ReidelCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Matusov, Eugene. 1998. “When solo activity is not privileged: Participation and internalization models of development.” Human Development 41:326–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mayhew, Bruce H. 1980. “Structuralism versus individualism.” Part 1, “Shadowboxing in the dark.” Social Forces 59:335–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mayhew, Bruce H. 1981. “Structuralism versus individualism.” Part 2, Ideological and other obfuscations.” Social Forces 59:627–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mayhew, Bruce H., Gray, Louis N., and Mayhew, Mary L.. 1971. “The behavior of interaction systems: Mathematical models of structure in interaction sequences.” General Systems 16:13–29Google Scholar

McCulloch, W., and Pitts, W.. 1943. “A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity.” Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 5:115–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McLaughlin, Brian P. 1992. “The rise and fall of British emergentism.” In: Emergence or reduction? Essays on the prospects of nonreductive physicalism, edited by Beckermann, Ansgar, Flohr, Hans, and Kim, Jaegwon (pp. 49–93). Berlin: Walter de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mead, George Herbert. 1932. The philosophy of the present. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Meehl, P. E., and Wilfrid Sellars. 1957. “The concept of emergence.” In: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 1, The foundations of science and the concepts of psychology and psychoanalysis, edited by Feigl, Herbert and Scriven, Michael (pp. 239–52). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota PressGoogle Scholar

Mellars, Paul A. 1985. “The ecological basis of social complexity in the Upper Paleolithic of southwestern France.” In: Prehistoric hunter-gatherers: The emergence of cultural complexity, edited by Price, T. D. and Brown, J. A. (pp. 271–97). New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar

Mellor, D. H. 1982. “The reduction of society.” Philosophy 57:51–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mendonça, Wilson. 2002. “Mental causation and the causal completeness of physics.” Principia 6:121–32Google Scholar

Menger, Carl. [1883] 1963. Problems of economics and sociology. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Originally published in 1883 as Untersuchungen über die Methode der Socialwissenschaften und der Politischen Oekonomie insbesondereGoogle Scholar

Merton, Robert K. 1968. “On sociological theories of the middle range.” In: Social theory and social structure, edited by Merton, Robert K. (pp. 39–72). New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar

Meyer, D. A., and Brown, T. A.. 1998. “Statistical mechanics of voting.” Physical Review Letters 81:1718–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mihata, Kevin. 1997. “The persistence of ‘emergence.’” In: Chaos, complexity, and sociology: Myths, models, and theories, edited by Eve, Raymond A., Horsfall, Sara, and Lee, Mary E. (pp. 30–8). Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Mill, John Stuart. 1843. A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence, and the methods of scientific investigation. London: J. W. ParkerGoogle Scholar

Mill, John Stuart, and Comte, Auguste. 1994. The correspondence of John Stuart Mill and Auguste Comte. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction PublishersGoogle Scholar

Miller, James G. 1978. Living systems. New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar

Miller, Barbara D. 1995. “Precepts and practices: Researching identity formation among Indian Hindu adolescents in the United States.” In: Cultural practices as contexts for development, edited by Goodnow, Jacqueline J., Miller, Peggy J., and Kessel, Frank (pp. 71–85). San Francisco: Jossey-BassGoogle Scholar

Minsky, Marvin. 1985. The society of mind. New York: Simon and SchusterGoogle Scholar

Möhring, Michael. 1996. “Social science multilevel simulation with MIMOSE.” In: Social science microsimulation, edited by Troitzsch, Klaus G., Mueller, Ulrich, Gilbert, G. Nigel, and Doran, Jim E. (pp. 123–37). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morgan, C. Lloyd. 1923. Emergent evolution. London: Williams and Norgate. Originally presented as the 1922 Gifford Lectures at the University of St. AndrewsGoogle Scholar

Moss, Scott. 1998. “Social simulation models and reality: Three approaches.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 45–78). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moss, Scott. 2001. “Messy systems: The target for multi agent based simulation.” In: Multi-agent-based simulation, edited by Moss, Scott and Davidsson, Paul (pp. 1–14). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moss, Scott, and Davidsson, Paul, eds. 2001. Multi-agent-based simulation. Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moulin, Bernard, and Brahim Chaib-Draa. 1996. “An overview of distributed artificial intelligence.” In: Foundations of distributed artificial intelligence, edited by O'Hare, G. M. P. and Jennings, N. R. (pp. 3–55). New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

Mullainathan, Sendhil, and Richard H. Thaler. 2001. “Behavioral economics.” In: International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, vol. 2, edited by Smelser, Neil J. and Baltes, Paul B. (pp. 1094–1100). New York: ElsevierGoogle Scholar

Münch, Richard, and Neil J. Smelser. 1987. “Relating the micro and macro.” In: The micro-macro link, edited by Alexander, Jeffrey C., Giesen, Bernhard, Münch, Richard, and Smelser, Neil J. (pp. 356–87). Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Murray, David J. 1995. Gestalt psychology and the cognitive revolution. New York: Harvester WheatsheafGoogle Scholar

Nagel, Ernest. 1961. The structure of science: Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace and WorldGoogle Scholar

Némedi, Dénes. 1995. “Collective consciousness, morphology, and collective representations: Durkheim's sociology of knowledge, 1894–1900.” Sociological Perspectives 38:41–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Newell, Allen, Herbert A. Simon, and J. C. Shaw. 1963. “GPS, a program that simulates human thought.” In: Computers and thought, edited by Feigenbaum, E. A. and Feldman, J. (pp. 279–93). New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar

Nicolis, G., and Prigogine, I.. 1977. Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

Nicolopoulou, Ageliki, and Michael Cole. 1993. “Generation and transmission of shared knowledge in the culture of collaborative learning: The Fifth Dimension, its play-world, and its institutional contexts.” In: Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development, edited by Forman, Ellice A., Minick, Norris, and Stone, C. Addison (pp. 283–314). New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Nowak, Andrzej, and Bibb Latané. 1994. “Simulating the emergence of social order from individual behavior.” In: Simulating societies: The computer simulation of social phenomena, edited by Gilbert, Nigel and Doran, Jim (pp. 63–84). London: UCL PressGoogle Scholar

Nowostawski, Mariusz, Martin Purvis, and Stephen Cranefield. 2001. “Modelling and visualizing agent conversations.” In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents ‘01), edited by Müller, Jörg P., Andre, Elisabeth, Sen, Sandip, and Frasson, Claude (pp. 234–35). Montreal: ACM PressGoogle Scholar

O'Hare, G. M. P., and Jennings, N. R., eds. 1996. Foundations of distributed artificial intelligence. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

O'Neill, John, ed. 1973. Modes of individualism and collectivism. New York: St. Martin's PressGoogle Scholar

Oyama, Susan. 1985. The ontogeny of information: Developmental systems and evolution. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Paolucci, Mario. 2002. “Review of The edge of organization: Chaos and complexity theories of formal social systems.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 5, http//jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/4/reviews/paolucci.htmlGoogle Scholar

Papineau, David. 1993. Philosophical naturalism. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

ParkE, Robert., and Burgess, Ernest W.. 1921. Introduction to the science of sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Parsons, Talcott. [1937] 1949. The structure of social action. New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar

Parsons, Talcott. 1951. The social system. Glencoe, IL: The Free PressGoogle Scholar

Parsons, Talcott. 1970. “On building social system theory: A personal history.” Daedalus 99:826–81Google Scholar

Parsons, Talcott, and Edward A. Shils. 1951. “Values, motives, and systems of action.” In: Toward a general theory of action, edited by Parsons, Talcott and Shils, Edward A. (pp. 47–275). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Parunak, H. Van Dyke, Robert Savit, and Rick L. Riolo. 1998. “Agent-based modeling vs. equation-based modeling: A case study and user's guide.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 10–25). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pêcheux, Michel. [1975] 1982. Language, semantics, and ideology. New York: St. Martin's Press. Originally published as Les vérités de La Palice: linguistique, sémantique, philosophie (Paris: François Maspero, 1975)Google Scholar

Pepper, Stephen C. 1926. “Emergence.” Journal of Philosophy 23:241–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pettit, Philip. 1993. The common mind: An essay on psychology, society, and politics. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Phillips, D. C. 1976. Holistic thought in social science. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Piaget, Jean. [1950] 1995. “Explanation in sociology.” In: Sociological studies, edited by Smith, Leslie (pp. 30–96). New York: Routledge. Originally published as Introduction a' l'épistémologie génétique, vol. 3 (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1950)Google Scholar

Piaget, Jean. 1952. “Jean Piaget.” In: A history of psychology in autobiography, edited by Boring, Edwin G., Langfeld, Herbert S., Werner, Heinz, and Yerkes, Robert M. (pp. 237–56). Worcester, MA: Clark University PressGoogle Scholar

Piaget, Jean. 1995. Sociological studies. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Pickel, Andreas, ed. 2004. Systems and mechanisms: A symposium on Mario Bunge's philosophy of social science. Special issue, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34, no. 2

Pickering, W. S. F. 1984. Durkheim's sociology of religion. Boston: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar

Pihlström, Sami. 2002. “The re-emergence of the emergence debate.” Principia 6:133–81Google Scholar

Pitt, Jeremy, Lloyd Kamara, and Alexander Artikis. 2001. “Interaction patterns and observable commitments in a multi-agent trading scenario.” In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents ‘01), edited by Müller, Jörg P., Andre, Elisabeth, Sen, Sandip, and Frasson, Claude (pp. 481–8). Montreal: ACM PressGoogle Scholar

Popper, Karl R. [1944–1945] 1957. The poverty of historicism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Originally published in Economica, 1944–1945Google Scholar

Popper, Karl R. 1962. Conjectures and Refutations. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Porpora, Douglas V. 1983. “On the prospects for a nomothetic theory of social structure.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 13:243–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Porpora, Douglas V. 1987. The concept of social structure. New York: Greenwood PressGoogle Scholar

Porpora, Douglas V. 1993. “Cultural rules and material relations.” Sociological Theory 11:212–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Porter, Theodore M. 1995. “Statistical and social facts from Quetelet to Durkheim.” Sociological Perspectives 38:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Prietula, Michael J., Carley, Kathleen M., and Gasser, , eds. 1998. Simulating organizations: Computational models of institutions and groups. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Prigogine, Ilya, and Peter M. Allen. 1982. “The challenge of complexity.” In: Self-organization and dissipative structures: Applications in the physical and social sciences, edited by Schieve, William C. and Allen, Peter M. (pp. 3–39). Austin: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar

Prigogine, Ilya, and Stengers, Isabelle. 1984. Order out of chaos: Man's new dialogue with nature. New York: Bantam BooksGoogle Scholar

Pynadath, David V., and Milind Tambe. 2002. “Multiagent teamwork: Analyzing the optimality and complexity of key theories and models.” In: AAMAS'02 (pp. 873–80). Bologna, Italy: ACM

Radnitzky, Gerard. 1992. “The economic approach.” In: Universal economics: Assessing the achievements of the economic approach, edited by Radnitzky, Gerard and Weinberg, Alvin M. (pp. 1–68). New York: Paragon HouseGoogle Scholar

Radnitzky, Gerard, and Bernholz, Peter, eds. 1987. Economic imperialism: The economic approach applied outside the field of economics. New York: Paragon HouseGoogle Scholar

Rao, Anand S., and Michael P. Georgeff. 1995. “BDI agents: From theory to practice.” In: ICMAS-95, edited by Lesser, Victor (pp. 312–19). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Rawls, Anne Warfield. 1987. “The interaction order sui generis: Goffman's contribution to social theory.” Sociological Theory 5:136–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rawls, Anne Warfield. 1990. “Emergent sociality: A dialectic of commitment and order.” Symbolic Interaction 13:63–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rawls, Anne Warfield. 1996. “Durkheim's epistemology: The neglected argument.” American Journal of Sociology 102:430–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ray, Thomas S., and Joseph Hart. 1998. “Evolution of differentiated multi-threaded digital organisms.” In: Artificial life VI, edited by Adami, Christoph, Belew, Richard K., Kitano, Hiroaki, and Taylor, Charles (pp. 295–304). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Reed, Michael, and Harvey, David L.. 1992. “The new science and the old: Complexity and realism in the social sciences.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 22:353–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reynolds, Craig W. 1987. “Flocks, herds, and schools: A distributed behavioral model.” Computer Graphics 21:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rich, Charles, Sidner, Candace L., and Lesh, Neal B.. 2001. “COLLAGEN: Applying collaborative discourse theory to human-computer interaction.” Artificial Intelligence Magazine 22:15–25Google Scholar

Ritzer, George. 1990. “Micro-macro linkage in sociological theory: Applying a metatheoretical tool.” In: Frontiers of social theory: The new syntheses, edited by Ritzer, George (pp. 347–70). New York: Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar

Ritzer, George. 1996. Modern sociological theory. 4th ed. Boston: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar

Ritzer, George. 2000. Modern sociological theory. 5th ed. Boston: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar

Ritzer, George, and Gindoff, Pamela. 1992. “Methodological relationism: Lessons for and from social psychology.” Social Psychology Quarterly 55:128–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, B. 1982. “Integrating context and cognitive development.” In: Advances in developmental psychology, edited by Lamb, M. E. and Brown, A. L. (pp. 125–70). Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, B. 1990. Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, Barbara. 1992. “Three ways to relate person and culture: Thoughts sparked by Valsiner's review of Apprenticeship in Thinking.” Human Development 35:316–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, Barbara. 1995. “Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship.” In: Sociocultural studies of mind, edited by Wertsch, J. V., Rio, P., and Alvarez, A. (pp. 139–64). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, B. (1997). Evaluating development in the process of participation: Theory, methods, and practice building on each other. In Amsel, E. & Renninger, A. (Eds.), Change and development (pp. 265–285). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, Barbara. 1998. “Cognition as a collaborative process.” In: Handbook of child psychology, 5th ed., vol. 2, Cognition, perception, and language, edited by Kuhn, Deanna and Siegler, Robert S. (pp. 679–744). New York: WileyGoogle Scholar

Rogoff, Barbara, Barbara Radziszewska, and Tracy Masiello. 1995. “Analysis of developmental processes in sociocultural activity.” In: Sociocultural psychology: Theory and practice of doing and knowing, edited by Martin, Laura M. W., Nelson, Katherine, and Tobach, Ethel (pp. 125–49). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosenberg, Alex. 1997. “Reductionism redux: Computing the embryo.” Biology and Philosophy 12:445–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rueger, Alexander. 2000. “Physical emergence, diachronic and synchronic.” Synthese 124:297–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rumelhart, David E., and McClelland, James L.. 1986. Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Russell, E. S., Morris, C. R., and Mackenzie, W. Leslie. 1926. “Symposium: The notion of emergence.” Aristotelian Society 6:39–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Saam, Nicole J. 1999. “Simulating the micro-macro link: New approaches to an old problem and an application to military coups.” Sociological Methodology 29:43–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation, vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Sallach, David L., and Charles N. Macal, eds. 2001. The simulation of social agents. Special issue, Social Science Computer Review

Sawyer, R. Keith. 1999. “The emergence of creativity.” Philosophical Psychology 12:447–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2001a. Creating conversations: Improvisation in everyday discourse. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton PressGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2001b. “Simulating emergence and downward causation in small groups.” In: Multi-agent-based simulation, edited by Moss, Scott and Davidsson, Paul (pp. 49–67). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2002a. “A discourse on discourse: An archeological history of an intellectual concept.” Cultural Studies 16:433–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2002b. “Nonreductive Individualism.” Part 1, “Supervenience and wild disjunction.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 32:537–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2003. “Assessing agent communication languages.” Pp. 273–296 in Challenges in social simulation. Chicago, IL: Argonne National Laboratory

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2003b. “Emergence in creativity and development.” In: Creativity and development, edited by Sawyer, R. Keith, John-Steiner, Vera, Moran, Seana, Sternberg, Robert, Feldman, David Henry, Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, and Nakamura, Jeanne (pp. 12–60). New York: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2003c. Group creativity: Music, theater, collaboration. Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2003d. Improvised dialogues: Emergence and creativity in conversation. Westport, CT: GreenwoodGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2003e. “Nonreductive individualism.” Part 2, “Social causation.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 33:203–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2004a. “The mechanisms of emergence.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34:260–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sawyer, R. Keith. 2004b. “Social explanation and computational simulation.” Philosophical Explorations 7:219–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1991. “Reflections on talk and social structure.” In: Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, edited by Boden, Deirdre and Zimmerman, Don H. (pp. 44–70). Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992. “In another context.” In: Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon, edited by Duranti, Alessandro and Goodwin, Charles (pp. 191–227). New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Schelling, Thomas C. 1971. “Dynamic models of segregation.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1:143–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmaus, Warren. 1994. Durkheim's philosophy of science and the sociology of knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Schmaus, Warren. 1999. “Functionalism and the meaning of social facts.” Philosophy of Science 66 (proceedings):S314–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schutz, Alfred. 1967. The phenomenology of the social world. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Original work published 1932Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1990. “Collective intentionality.” In: Intentions in communication, edited by Cohen, P. R., Morgan, J., and Pollack, M. E. (pp. 401–15). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Serrano, Juan Manual, and Sascha Ossowski. 2000. “Domain extensions to the FIPA-ACL: An application to decision support systems.” In: Simposio Español de Informática Distribuida (SEID-2000; pp. 1–14). Ourense, Spain: University of Vigo

Serrano, Juan Manuel, and Sascha Ossowski. 2002. “An organizational metamodel for the design of catalogues of communicative actions.” In: Intelligent agents and multi-agent systems, edited by Kuwabara, Kazuhiro and Lee, Jaeho (pp. 92–108). Berlin: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Servat, David, Edith Perrier, Jean-Pierre Treuil, and Alexis Drogoul. 1998. “When agents emerge from agents: Introducing multi-scale viewpoints in multi-agent simulations.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 183–98). Berlin, Germany: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shibutani, Tamotsu. 1961. Society and personality: An interactionist approach to social psychology. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shweder, Richard A. 1990. “Cultural psychology – What is it?” In: Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development, edited by Stigler, James W., Shweder, Richard A., and Herdt, Gilbert (pp. 1–43). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shweder, Richard A. 1995. “The confessions of a methodological individualist.” Culture and Psychology 1:115–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sichman, Jaime S., and Conte, Rosaria. 1995. “DEPNET: How to benefit from social dependence.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 20:161–77Google Scholar

Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel, eds. 1998. Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation. Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sierra, Carles, Nicholas R. Jennings, Pablo Noriega, and Simon Parsons. 1998. “A framework for argumentation-based negotiation.” In: Intelligent agents IV: Agent theories, architectures, and languages, edited by Singh, Munindar P., Rao, Anand S., and Wooldridge, Michael (pp. 177–92). Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop, ATAL'97, Providence, RI, July 24–26, 1997CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Silverstein, M. 1979. “Language structure and linguistic ideology.” In: The elements: A parasession on linguistic units and levels, edited by Clyne, P. R. (pp. 193–247). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic SocietyGoogle Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 1981. “The limits of awareness.”Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development LaboratoryGoogle Scholar

Simmel, Georg. 1950. The sociology of Georg Simmel. New York: The Free PressGoogle Scholar

Simon, Herbert A. 1955. “A behavioral model of rational choice.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 69:99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simon, Herbert A. 1969. The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Simon, Herbert A. 1999. “Karl Duncker and cognitive science.” From Past to Future: Clark Papers on the History of Psychology 1:1–11Google Scholar

Smart, J. J. C. 1981. “Physicalism and emergence.” Neuroscience 6:109–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Smelser, Neil J., and Swedberg, Richard, eds. 1994. The handbook of economic sociology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Smith, Joseph W., and Turner, Bryan S.. 1986. “Constructing social theory and constituting society.” Theory, Culture and Society 3:125–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, Thomas S. 1997. “Nonlinear dynamics and the micro-macro bridge.” In: Chaos, complexity, and sociology: Myths, models, and theories, edited by Eve, Raymond A., Horsfall, Sara, and Lee, Mary E. (pp. 52–63). Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Smith, Thomas S., and Stevens, Gregory T.. 1999. “The architecture of small networks: Strong interaction and dynamic organization in small social systems.” American Sociological Review 64:403–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sober, Elliott. 1999. “The multiple realizability argument against reductionism.” Philosophy of Science 66:542–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Souter, Ralph William. 1933. Prolegomena to relativity economics: An elementary study in the mechanics and organics of an expanding economic universe. New York: Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar

Spaulding, Edward Gleason. 1918. The new rationalism: The development of a constructive realism upon the basis of modern logic and science, and through the criticism of opposed philosophical systems. New York: Henry HoltGoogle Scholar

Sperry, R. W. 1980. “Mind-brain interaction: Mentalism, yes; dualism, no.” Neuroscience 5:195–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steels, Luc. 1996. “Self-organizing vocabularies.” In: Proceedings of Alife V: Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems, edited by Langton, Christopher G. and Shimohara, Katsunori (pp. 179–84). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Steels, Luc, and Frederic Kaplan. 1998. “Stochasticity as a source of innovation in language games.” In: Artificial life VI, edited by Adami, Christoph, Belew, Richard K., Kitano, Hiroaki, and Taylor, Charles (pp. 368–76). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Stephan, Achim. 1997. “Armchair arguments against emergentism.” Erkenntnis 46:305–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stephan, Achim. 1998. “Varieties of emergence in artificial and natural systems.” Zeitschrift für Naturforschung C: A Journal of Biosciences 53:639–56Google Scholar

Stigler, James W., Shweder, Richard A., and Herdt, Gilbert, eds. 1990. Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, Gregory P., and Farberman, Harvey A.. 1967. “On the edge of rapprochement: Was Durkheim moving toward the perspective of symbolic interaction?” Sociological Quarterly 8:149–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stryker, Sheldon. 1980. Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.Google Scholar

Suchman, Lucy A. 1987. Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Suchting, Wal. 1992. “Reflections upon Roy Bhaskar's ‘critical realism.’” Radical Philosophy 61:23–31Google Scholar

Sullivan, David G., Barbara J. Grosz, and Sarit Kraus. 2000. “Intention reconciliation by collaborative agents.” In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Multiagent Systems (ICMAS 2000; pp. 293–300). Boston: IEEE Computer Society

Sumpter, David J. T., and D. S. Broomhead. 1998. “Formalising the link between worker and society in honey bee colonies.” In: Multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation, edited by Sichman, Jaime S., Conte, Rosaria, and Gilbert, Nigel (pp. 95–110). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Swedberg, Richard. 1987. “Economic sociology: Past and present.” Current Sociology 35Google Scholar

Symons, John. 2002. “Emergence and reflexive downward causation.” Principia 6:183–202Google Scholar

Sztompka, Piotr. 1991. Society in action: The theory of social becoming. Chicago: University of ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Sztompka, Piotr. 1994. “Society as social becoming: Beyond individualism and collectivism.” Pp. 251–282 in Agency and structure: Reorienting social theory, edited by Sztompka, Piotr. Yverdon, Switzerland: Gordon and BreachGoogle Scholar

Tambe, Milind. 1997. “Towards flexible teamwork.” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 7:83–124Google Scholar

Tannen, Deborah, ed. 1993. Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Tarde, Gabriel. 1969. On communication and social influence: Selected papers. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Taylor, Charles. 1985. Human agency and language. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Teller, Paul. 1992. “A contemporary look at emergence.” In: Emergence or reduction? Essays on the prospects of nonreductive physicalism, edited by Beckermann, Ansgar, Flohr, Hans, and Kim, Jaegwon (pp. 139–53). Berlin: Walter de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thelen, E., and Smith, L. B.. 1994. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Thompson, John B. 1989. “The theory of structuration.” In: Social theory in modern societies: Anthony Giddens and his critics, edited by Held, David and Thompson, John B. (pp. 56–76). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thrift, Nigel. 1999. “The place of complexity.” Theory, Culture and Society 16:31–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tullock, Gordon. 1972. “Economic imperialism.” In: Theory of public choice: Political applications of economics, edited by Buchanan, James M. and Tollison, Robert D. (pp. 317–29). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan PressGoogle Scholar

Turner, Stephen P. 1986. The search for a methodology of social science: Durkheim, Weber, and the nineteenth-century problem of cause, probability, and action. Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. ReidelCrossRefGoogle Scholar