The object of activity: Making sense of the sense-maker

Mind, Culture, and Activity

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 4-18

  Kaptelinin, Victor ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645128967     PISSN: 10749039     EISSN: 15327884     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327884mca1201_2     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Bratus, B. (1983). General psychological activity theory and the problem of units of analysis of personality. In A. V. Zaporozhets, V. P. Zinchenko, O. V. Ovchinnikova,& O.K. Tikhomirov (Eds.), A. N. Leontiev and modern psychology(pp. 212-219). Moscow: Moscow State University Press. (In Russian)
2. Cypher, A. (1986). The structure of users' activities. In D. Norman & S. Draper (Eds.), User centered system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction (pp. 243-263). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
3. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta Konsultit
4. Engeström, Y. (1990). Learning, working and imagining; Twelve studies in activity theory. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta Konsultit
5. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). New York: Cambridge University Press
6. Engeström, Y.,& Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen,&R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.) Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1-16). New York: Cambridge University Press
7. Foot, K. (2002a, June). Object: constructed or apprehended? Paper presented at the Fifth Congress of the International Society for Cultural Research and Activity Theory (Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 18-22, 2002)
8. Foot, K. (2002b). Pursuing an evolving object: Object formation and identification in a conflict monitoring network. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9, 132-149
9. Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. (Original work published 1975)
10. Leontiev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of the mind. Moscow: Progress. (Original work published 1959)
11. Miettinen, R. (1999). The riddle of things. Activity theory and actor network theory as approaches of studying innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6, 170-195
12. Nardi, B. (Ed.). (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
13. Ozhegov, S. I. (1982). Dictionary of the Russian Language (14th ed.). Moscow: Russky Yazyk
14. Saari, E. (2002). Symbiosis, contradiction and fragility in the subject-object relationship: A case of two aerosol researchers. Paper presented at the Fifth Congress of the International Society for Cultural Research and Activity Theory (Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 18-22, 2002)
15. Saari, E. (2003). The pulse of change in research work: A study of learning and development in a research group. Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki University Press
16. Stetsenko, A. (1995). The role of the principle of object-relatedness in the theory of activity. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 33, 54-69
17. Sutter, B. (2002). The guiding function of the object of work. Paper presented at the Fifth Congress of the International Society for Cultural Research and Activity Theory (Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 18-22, 2002)