Browsing by Subject "double stimulation"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-3 of 3
  • Sannino, Annalisa; Engeström, Yrjö H M (2017)
    Formative interventions and the specific method of the Change Laboratory (CL) are presented as examples of intervention research that generates actionable and societally impactful knowledge. In contrast with stabilization knowledge that fixates phenomena into static categories, actionable knowledge is understood here as collaborative and generative possibility knowledge intertwined with transformative action. The article asks what can be learned from the different ways the epistemological principles behind formative interventions are implemented in different CLs. Three CL interventions are analyzed. The analysis is summarized with the help of a grid covering the key characteristics of formative interventions: contradictions, conflicts of motives, double stimulation, zone of proximal development, germ cells and emerging concepts. Comparison of the three cases shows that understanding the specific historical stage of the development of contradictions in a given organization is of foundational importance. In transformations induced by CLs, contradiction and conflict may be seen as acute push and the future-oriented concept as gradually emerging pull, with the change actions of the local practitioners in the middle. Constructing a germ cell and eventually an expanded concrete concept based on it are the most demanding challenges for CL interventions.
  • Sannino, A.; Engeström, Y. (2018)
    The article presents central ideas and future challenges of cultural-historical activity theory, focusing specifically on the work of the so-called Helsinki school of activity theory. We first introduce the revolutionary roots of the theory in the works of Marx and Vygotsky, and the evolution of the unit of analysis through different generations of activity theory. We then discuss the foundational role of historicity and dialectics in activity theory. We identify two central epistemological-methodological principles that guide activity-theoretical studies, namely the principle of double stimulation and the principle of ascending from the abstract to the concrete. These principles lead us to emphasize formative interventions as a powerful way to conduct societally impactful activity-theoretical research. We conclude by pointing out some major challenges facing activity theory in the 21st century.
  • Niyazmuradova, Rano (Helsingin yliopisto, 2019)
    Understanding social dynamics and interactions between people in uncertain situations is vital for all organizations that seek new solutions to complex situations in rapidly changing environments. This phenomenon is fundamental to modern Cultural Historical Activity Theory that intertwines all elements of collective activity system and chains them towards new expansive paths of development. This study aims at investigating how background social interactions and characteristics of groups play a role in subsequent social dynamics and discourse in meaningless situations. Meaningless situations are created in double stimulation experiments run on groups of individuals in the University of Helsinki during 2012-2013. In these experiment, groups of 2-4 people are left uniformed in a room for 30 minutes, while their interactions are observed and recorded by investigators. The concentration of this analysis is on Finnish nationalities with shared activity. Such sample selection allows for better isolation of the dynamics in question from other confounding factors such nationalities and types of activities. In this study, I explore how: 1) differences in the discourse in the experiments; 2) differences in social dynamics before and during the experiments; as well as 3) interaction between social dynamics and discourse, affect groups’ decisions to break out of meaningless situations. I draw my conclusions from thematic analysis of experimental data, and additional information retrieved from subsequent interviews. Analysis of the data shows that social interactions between groups’ participants before the experiments had a decisive impact on the discourse, further social dynamics, and ultimate decisions to break out of meaningless situations in the experiments. The more affiliated the participants of the groups were before the experiments, the less group dynamics and co-constructive discourse there were in the experiment, and the more likely they were to leave the experiments prematurely. Accordingly, highly cohesive groups of co-workers, who had obviously completed major stages of group dynamics before the experiments, eventually broke out of meaningless situations in the experiments. These groups were devoid of the necessity to undergo further group dynamics through co-constructive discourse. On the other end of the spectrum are the groups of students who were acquainted before the experiments superficially at most. In these groups, we could observe further group formation, and unifying themes in the discourses that they led during the experiments. The groups of students did not break out of meaningless situations in the experiments, even though the initial stages of the break-out-process in these groups were more intense than it was the case in the groups of co-workers. The findings in this study should have repercussions for Cultural Historical Activity Theory in general, and its practical formative interventionist approach - Change Laboratory, in particular. The observations made in this study are in line with major claims in contemporary Cultural Historical Activity Theory that a search for new object-oriented activity is perpetual and mapped from the complex of social interactions chained in historical processes. Moreover, they touch upon an additional important dimension – discourse within groups in uncertain situations, that is to be explored further in future research.