Considering diversity: Multivoicedness in international academic collaboration

Culture and Psychology

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 461-485

  Akkerman, Sanne ^a   Admiraal, Wilfried ^b   Simons, Robert Jan ^a   Niessen, Theo ^c  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Boundary crossing; Collaboration; Dialogical processes; Discourse analysis; Diversity; Multivoiced

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751094281     PISSN: 1354067X     EISSN: 14617056     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1354067X06069947     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Abbott, A. (1995). Things of boundaries. Social Research, 62, 857-883.
2. Akkerman, S., Admiraal, W., Brekelmans, M., & Oost, H. (in press). Auditing quality of research in social sciences. Quality & Quantity.
3. Akkerman, S., Admiraal, W., & Simons, R. J. (2006). Collaborative activities in academic work. Manuscript submitted for publication.
4. Alexandrov, V. E. (2000). Biology, semiosis, and cultural difference in Lotman's semiosphere. Comparative Literature, 52, 399-423.
5. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed. & Trans.; C. Emerson, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
6. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; V.W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
7. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Davies, B., & Harré, R. (2001). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice (pp. 216-271). London: Sage.
9. Derry, S., Adams DuRussel, L., & O'Donnell, A. M. (1998). Individual and distributed cognitions in interdisciplinary teamwork: A developing case study and emerging theory. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 25-56.
10. Engeström, Y. (1999). Communication, discourse and activity. Communication Review, 3 (1-2). 165-185.
11. Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5, 319-336.
12. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
13. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
14. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1361.
15. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalisic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75-91.
16. Gurevitch, Z. D. (1988). The other side of dialogue: On making the other strange and the experience of otherness. American Journal of Sociology, 93, 1179-1199.
17. Gutiérrez, K. D., Baquedano-López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid. Language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture and Activity, 6, 286-303.
18. Halpern, E.S. (1983). Auditing naturalistic inquiries: The development and application of a model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Indiana.
19. Hermans, H. J. M. (2001). The dialogical self: Toward a theory of personal and cultural positioning. Culture & Psychology, 7, 243-281.
20. Hermans, H. J. M., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). The dialogical self: Meaning as movement. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21. Homan, T. (2001). Teamleren. Theorie en facilitatie [Team learning. Theory and facilitation]. Schoonhoven: Academic Services.
22. Knorr Cetina, K. D. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Lotman, Y. M. (1990). Universe of the mind: A semiotic theory of culture (A. Shukman, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
24. Lotman, Y. M. (1994). Text within a text. Publications of the Modern Language Association, 109, 377-384.
25. Marks, M. A., Burke, C. S., Sabella, M. J., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2002). The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 3-13.
26. Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273-283.
27. Matusov, E. (1996). Intersubjectivity without agreement. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3, 25-45.
28. Mohammed, S., & Ringseis, E. (2001). Cognitive diversity and consensus in group decision making: The role of inputs, processes and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 310-335.
29. Morris, P. (Ed.). (1994). The Bakhtin reader. London: Edward Arnold.
30. Ryan, D. P., Cott, C., & Robertson, D. (1997). Conceptual tools for thinking about interteam work in clinical gerontology. Educational Gerontology, 23, 651-667.
31. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
32. Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, 'translations' and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420.
33. Valsiner, J., & Van der Veer, R. (2000). The social mind: Construction of the idea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
36. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
37. Wertsch, J., & Toma, C. (1995). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. In L. P. Steffle & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 159-175). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., & Yates, S. J. (2001). Discourse as data. London: Sage.
39. Yoo, Y., & Kanawattanachai, P. (2001). Developments of transactive memory systems and collective mind in virtual teams. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9, 187-208.