On the quest for disciplinary unity and the virtues of open concepts

Journal title RIVISTA DI PSICOLOGIA CLINICA
Author/s Brady Wagoner
Publishing Year 2023 Issue 2022/2
Language English Pages 8 P. 103-110 File size 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/rpc2-2022oa14745
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

View article Download Open Access article

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

One key strategy for unifying the discipline of psychology is to develop a meta-theoretical framework through the advancement of core concepts.  Rather than having these be strictly defined from the outset, this commentary argues for the utility of open-ended concepts for scientific advancement. This is illustrated with a brief historical review and current status of Prägnanz, assimiliation-accommodation, schema, liminality and mediation, which also show the difficulties on finding core concepts for psychology as a whole. Open-ended concepts may be useful here in that they can help to bring together converging lines of research from different approaches within psychology. Finally, a case is made for mediationas a core concept that is currently converging with notions of extended and distributed cognition. 

Keywords: ; core concepts; disciplinary unity; mediation; social representations; schema

  1. Boesch, E. E. (1971). Zwischen zwei Wirklichkeiten. Prolegomena zu einer ökolgischen Psychologie. Bern: Huber.
  2. Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the Subject. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Wundt, W. (1890/2009). Outlines of psychology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Library.
  5. Wagoner, B. & Zittoun, T. (eds.) (2021). Experience on the Edge: Theorizing Liminality. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
  6. Wagoner, B. (2017b). The constructive mind: Bartlett’s psychology in reconstruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Wagoner, B. (2017a). What makes memory constructive? A study in the serial reproduction of Bartlett’s experiments. Culture & Psychology, 23(2), 186-207. DOI: 10.1177/1354067X17695759
  8. Wagoner, B. (2013). Bartlett’s concept of schema in reconstruction. Theory & Psychology, 23(5), 553-575. DOI: 10.1177/0959354313500166
  9. Valsiner, J. (2012). An Invitation to Cultural Psychology. London: Sage.
  10. Valsiner, J. (2003). The process structure of semiotic mediation. Human Development, 44, 84-97.
  11. Vygotsky, L. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 4. The history of the development of higher mental functions. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
  12. Van Gennep, A. (1960). Rites of Passage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  13. Turner, V. (1967). The Forest of Symbols. Ithica: Cornell University Press.
  14. Stenner, P. Greco, M. & Motzkau, J. F. (2017). Special issue on liminal hotspots. Theory & Psychology, 27(2), 141-289. DOI: 10.1177/09593543166878
  15. Shweder, R. (1991). Thinking through culture: Expediations in cultural psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  16. Salvatore, S., Andò, A., Ruggieri, R. A., Bucci, F., Cordella, B., Freda, M.F., Lombardo, C., Coco, G. L., Novara, C., Petito, A., Schimmenti, A., Vegni, E., Venuleo, C., Zagaria, A. & Zennaro, A. (2022). Compartmentalization and unity of professional psychology. A road map for the future of the discipline. Rivista di Psicologia Clinica/Journal of Clinical Psychology (1), 7-33.
  17. Riley, D. A. (1962). Memory for form. In L. Postman (ed.), Psychology in the making. New York, NY: Knopf.
  18. Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. London: Routledge.
  19. Newen, A., De Bruin, L. & Gallagher, S. (2020). The Oxford Handbook of 4E Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  20. Moscovici, S. (1976/2008). Psychoanalysis: Its image and its public. Polity. Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. M. Farr, & S. Moscovici (eds.), Social Representations (pp. 101-123). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  21. Moscovici, S. (1966). L’histoire des sciences et la science des historiens. Archives Européennes Sociologiques, VII, 116-126. DOI: 10.1017/S0003975600001363
  22. Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Brady Wagoner, On the quest for disciplinary unity and the virtues of open concepts in "RIVISTA DI PSICOLOGIA CLINICA" 2/2022, pp 103-110, DOI: 10.3280/rpc2-2022oa14745