How does cognition get distributed? case studies of making concepts general in technical and scientific work

Generalization of Knowledge: Multidisciplinary Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 225-246

  Hall, Rogers ^a   Wieckert, Kären ^b   Wright, Kenneth ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BELMONT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920992903     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203848036     Document Type: Chapter

References (32)

1. Anderson, M., & Fienberg, S. E. (2000). Partisan politics at work: Sampling and the 2000 Census. Political Science and Politics, 33(4), 795–799.
2. Becvar, L. A., Hollan, J., & Hutchins, E. (2005). Hands as molecules: Representational gestures as cognitive artifacts for developing theory in a scientific laboratory. Semiotica, 156(1/4), 89–112.
3. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Mechanisms of insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Engestrom, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamaki, R. L. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training. (N.d.). Course programme 2006. Retrieved November 14, 2009, from http://www.epiet.org/course/coursep2006.html
7. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155–170.
8. Gentner, D. (2002). Analogical reasoning, psychology of. In Encyclopedia of cognitive science (Vol. 1, pp. 106–112). London: Nature Publishing Group.
9. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1–38.
10. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1987). The cognitive basis of knowledge transfer. In S. M. Cormier & J. D. Hagman (Eds.), Transfer of learning: Contemporary research and applications (pp. 9–46). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
11. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633.
12. Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social Studies of Science, 25, 237–274.
13. Goodwin, C. (2000). Practices of seeing, visual analysis: An ethnomethodological approach. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 157–182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Greeno, J. G., & Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Project Group. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.
15. Hall, R. (1999). Case studies of math at work: Exploring design-oriented mathematical practices in school and work settings (Final report to the National Science Foundation, No. RED–9553648). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
16. Hall, R. (2005). Reconstructing the learning sciences. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(1), 139–155.
17. Hall, R., Stevens, R., & Torralba, A. (2002). Disrupting representational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(3), 179–210.
18. Hall, R., Wright, K., & Wieckert, K. (2007). Interactive and historical processes of distributing statistical concepts through work organization. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(1–2), 103–127.
19. Hook, E. B., & Regal, R. R. (1995). Capture-recapture methods in epidemiology: Methods and limitations. Epidemiologic Reviews, 17, 243–264.
20. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Hutchins, E. (2006). Imagining the cognitive life of things. Unpublished manuscript (Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego).
22. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39–104.
23. Jurow, A. S. (2004). Generalizing in interaction: Middle school mathematics students making mathematical generalizations in a population modeling project. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(4), 279–300.
24. Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In W. Labov (Ed.), Language in the inner city (pp. 354–396). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
25. Lemke, J. (2001). The long and the short of it: Comments on multiple timescale studies of human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1–2), 17–26.
26. Ochs, E., Jacoby, S., & Gonzales, P. (1994). Interpretive journeys: How physicists talk and travel through graphic space. Configurations, 1, 151–171.
27. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation (Vols. 1 and 2, Ed. Gail Jefferson). Oxford: Blackwell.
28. Saxe, G. B., & Esmonde, I. (2005). Studying cognition in flux: A historical treatment of “fu” in the shifting structure of Oksapmin mathematics. Mind, Culture and Activity, 12(3–4), 171–225.
29. Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick, J. L. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 150–171). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
30. Tuomi-Grohn, T., & Engestrom, Y. (2003). Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary crossing. Amsterdam: EARLI.
31. Wartofsky, M. (1983). The child’s construction of the world and the world’s construction of the child: From historical epistemology to historical psychology. In F. S. Kessel & A. W. Siegel (Eds.), The child and other cultural inventions (pp. 188–215). New York: Praeger.
32. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.