Activity theory

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The activity theory (Engl. Activity theory ) also known as activity theory is a psychological theory that in the 1930s in Kharkov by Aleksei N. Leontiev was developed (Leontiev) and employees. It is a further development of the work that emerged in Moscow in the 1920s as part of the work around the psychologists Lev Semjonowitsch Wygotski (Vygotskij), Alexander Romanowitsch Lurija (Luria) and Alexei Nikolajewitsch Leontjew (Leont'ev), which is now known as the Cultural History School . According to activity theory, the relationship between man and the environment is a social one, characterized by the development of cultural tools and symbols.

history

The theory of activity, which is closely oriented towards culture and social change, was developed by a group of Russian psychologists , whose work constellations are now often known as the culture-historical school . The roots of today's theory of activity go back to the USSR in the 20s of the twentieth century. Lev Semjonowitsch Wygotski (1896–1934), who is often regarded as the actual founder of the theory of activity, formulated relevant concepts. Dissatisfied with the two psychological paradigms relevant at this time - psychoanalysis and behaviorism - Vygotsky and his colleagues Lurija and Leontjew developed a new theory as a foundation for understanding human development: the concept of object-oriented and object-mediated activity .

This concept was then worked out and further developed by a group of psychologists around Leontjew, the so-called Kharkov School of Psychology, in the 1930s. Based on the teachings of Marx , the Russian researchers were looking for a suitable conceptual and meaningful framework for a modern psychology. The initial consideration was the inseparability of consciousness and physical activity. For many years, the theory of activity became the leading direction in Russian psychology.

Activity theory gained international attention in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Leontiev's Activity, Awareness and Personality has been translated into English, and a collection of papers by Leontiev and other activity theorists has been published. There was a growing number of interested parties in Finland, Germany, Denmark and the USA. Relevant was u. a. the dissertation Learning by Expanding by Yrjö Engeström .

Several writings and books were published during this time (e.g. Engeström 1990, Nardi 1996, Engeström et al. 1999). They contributed to the growing interest in the potential of activity theory. Since the mid-1980s there have been attempts to expand the original focus of activity theory, developmental psychology , to other areas. Since the mid-1980s, three main branches have emerged which pursued the application of activity theory to various disciplines.

  1. The origins of activity theory were continued in learning theory, especially for the target group of children (Vygotsky 1978; Bruner 1996; Chaiklin et al. 1999; Engeström et al. 1999)
  2. Another branch developed activity theory as a method for analyzing learning processes in work environments (Boedker 1990; Nardi 1996; Engeström et al. 2005)
  3. A third group dealt with the basics for activities in the context of Computer Supported Cooperative Work ( CSCW ) and Human Computer Interaction ( HCI ) (Kuuti 1991; Korpela and Mursu 2003).

The central message of many studies in every area of ​​application is that activities must be analyzed on the individual as well as on the social and cultural level.

Vygotsky's contribution

In The History of Higher Psychological Functions (1931), Vygotsky differentiates between psychological tools and technical tools , later criticizing the tool's metaphor on a psychological level. The main difference between the two tool categories is the direction of action. While technical tools affect the material environment of the acting subject using tools (see also action regulation theory ), psychological tools (e.g. language , sketches , formulas ) serve to organize human behavior . Vygotsky's basic question was initially related to the natural and socio-historical development of higher psychological functions, in particular thinking and speaking (Vygotskij, 1934/2002). In this way, in the field of psychology and pedagogy, he worked to overcome the dichotomy between the sciences in the humanities and natural sciences . The question of the thesis was placed in a cultural-psychological context: To what extent are the development processes of psychological activities such as thinking, remembering and learning part of socio-cultural development? So initially a psychological concept of activity was in the foreground: In Russian, as in German, there are two terms, namely aktivnost (activity) and deyatelnost (activity). In English, however, this distinction was lost when both terms were translated with activity . Both terms play a different role in the psychological approach of the cultural-historical school , so they cannot be used synonymously. The key word for the concept of activity ( deyatelnost ), which A. N. Leontjew in particular made strong, is on the one hand Hegel and on the other hand Marx , who introduced a paradigm shift in the practice-philosophical paradigm in the first Feuerbach thesis and criticized that with previous materialism, “the object, the reality , Sensuality is grasped only under the form of the object or perception; but not as sensual human activity or practice; not subjective. "

Leontiev's contribution

AN Leontjew took up this concept of activity, which was shaped by Marx and Hegel. Its central concept is that of objective activity .

In the sense of a natural history of the psychic, Leontjew examined the transitions and differences between activity on an animal and human level in problems of the development of the psychic . It was crucial that people don't just spontaneously respond to their needs - e.g. B. when feeling hungry - or by certain genetically determined behavior patterns, but rather organize the production of all the goods that meet their specifically human needs by division of labor . In contrast to hunting animals, which very rarely cooperate with each other to hunt down prey, humans already developed a completely new development path in their early history, for example in the cooperation between hunters and drivers: a form of gaining life based on the division of labor and dependent on cooperation . This new quality of development is the historical-social in contrast to the evolutionary, natural-historical. The Critical psychology was about following Leontiev in developing a methodically secure the concept of subjectivity / psyche of a study of animal-human transition from field. According to Leontjew, the emergence of a form of gaining life based on the division of labor is also central to the development of the human psyche, since individuals need social intelligence and the ability to anticipate in order to achieve a larger goal through several subordinate goals and partial actions. You need an insight into the work of others who manage different tasks within a work process.

Leontiev's activity - consciousness - personality therefore introduced a subdivision of levels: the level of activity (overall process, complete work process such as hunting), the level of actions (partial tasks such as driving the herd) and the level of operations (hand movements, instrumental skills ).

Activity theory has had a major influence on the formation of theories and method development in work and organizational psychology. An example of this is the theory of action regulation , which is based on concepts of activity theory (activity, action, operation) as dynamic implementation structures of human activity. Other examples are the work of Yrjö Engeström and the staff of the Center for Activity Theory / Developmental Work Research.

Action Theory Concepts

The basic assumption of activity theory is that the human psyche arises and is constantly evolving. But it can only be understood in the context of meaningful, goal-oriented and sociologically relevant interactions between people and their materialized environment. Activity theory encompasses five basic principles. Kaptelinin (1992) names the most important:

  1. the hierarchical structure of activities
  2. the principle of object orientation
  3. the dual concept of internalization versus externalization
  4. the principle of “mediating” through aids
  5. the principle of continuous development

These principles pervade every act of an activity and form the basis for understanding its substantial internal dynamics. The investigation unit activity as "the minimal, meaningful context" to describe the actions of an individual is to be understood as a model. The elements are interdependent. The activity forms a kind of framework in which the individual elements interact and relate to one another - visually similar to a crystal lattice.

Hierarchical levels

According to Leontjew, activity theory distinguishes three levels that build on one another: operations , actions and activities . The orientations of each level are subordinate to those of the higher level. Leontjew proposes a three-part structure to denote the orientations of each level: corresponding to activities, actions and operations he names motives , goals and instrumental conditions and compulsions . Motives drive activities. These build on actions that are geared towards goals. Actions, in turn, are based on operations that result from instrumental conditions and constraints.

The levels also differ in the focus group assigned to them. Activities are carried out by communities, individual actions by an individual or a group and operations correspond to routine human work or can also be procedures that are also carried out by machines (e.g. gear shifting of a vehicle).

Object orientation

The objective activity describes a central principle of activity theory. People live in a world that is shaped by tangible objects. However, these objects do not only have physical properties (shape, color, smell, etc.). Characteristics are also impressed on them that have been determined socially and culturally and result from history (the printed Bible as the basis of a community of values, the moon rock as a rarity, the cup as a trophy). Objects therefore not only have material properties, but also social-cultural properties, such as the history of their creation and use. In general, objects - whether tangible (fork, circular saw, pocket calculator) or mental (being able to write, formulating hypotheses, solving problems) - are of great importance for the relationship between people and their immediate environment.

Internalization versus externalization

Activity theory has a dual aspect: It distinguishes internal from external activities. The classic psychological term of “psychological processes” roughly corresponds to internal activities, whereas external activities are referred to as external activities. Internal activities are, however, in a reciprocal dynamic with external ones. They are mutually dependent and can often be converted into one another (e.g. mastering the basic arithmetic operations in an abacus or pocket calculator). The dynamics and the overall context of an activity determine when and why external activities are internalized or vice versa.

Tool brokerage

The teaching of tools explains another central principle of activity theory. It denotes the fact that an activity is characterized by the fact that an individual uses tools to change an object. A distinction is made between two aspects for the use of aids:

  1. Tools determine the way people interact with reality;
  2. Aids reflect the experience of people who have faced similar problems before. A hammer z. B. includes the experience of people trying to break a stone or drive a nail into the wall.

The aid and social development are also interrelated. The steam engine from James Watt z. B. was a driving factor for the industrial revolution and consequently changed society forever. Tools are never used in a vacuum; rather, it is shaped by the social and cultural context in which they are used.

Continuous development

Activity theory postulates that the individual interaction of activities with reality should be analyzed in the context of development. In contrast to other psychological theories, in which development is viewed as an important subject of investigation, in activity theory all activities are seen as the result of certain historical developments. Activities are also constantly evolving and subject to constant change.

literature

Activity theory in the Soviet Union

  • AN Leontjew: Problems of the Development of the Psychic . People and Knowledge, Berlin 1964.
  • AN Leont'ev: Early writings . Published by Georg Rückriem. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2001.
  • AN Leont'ev: Early Writings. Volume 2 . Published by Georg Rückriem. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2006.
  • AN Leont'ev: Activity - Consciousness - Personality . Edited by Georg Rückriem, translated by Elana Hoffmann. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2012.
  • AN Leontiev: Activity, Consciousness and Personality . Englewood Cliffs, New York 1978. (English)
  • AN Leontiev: Problems of the Development of the Mind . Progress, Moscow 1981. (English)
  • LS Vygotskij (Wygotsky): The mental systems . In: J. Lompscher (Ed.): Selected writings. Vol. 1, Lehmanns Media, Berlin 1930/2003, pp. 319-352.
  • LSVygotsky: History of the higher mental functions . (Advances in Psychology, Vol. 5). Lit Verlag, Münster 1931/1992.
  • LS Vygotsky: Thinking and Speaking . Ed. U. trans. v. J. Lompscher and G. Rückriem. Beltz, Weinheim 1934/2002.
  • LS Vygotskij: Basics of pedology . 1934. For excerpts see: R. van der Veer, J. Valsiner: The Vygotsky Reader. Blackwell, Cambridge 1994.
  • LS Vygotsky: Thought and Language . John Wiley & Sons, New York 1962. (English)
  • LS Vygotsky: Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Harvard Business Press, Cambridge, MA 1978. (Vygotsky's texts abridged and edited by the editors) (English)

International reception and further development

  • S. Boedker: Activity theory as a challenge to systems design . Aarhus University, Aarhus 1990. (English)
  • Y. Engeström: Learning by expanding . Orienta Consultit, Helsinki 1987. (English)
  • Y. Engeström: Learning, working and imagining: twelve studies in activity theory . Orienta-Konsultit, Helsinki 1990. (English)
  • Y. Engeström: Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory . In S. Chaiklin, J. Lave (Ed.): Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context. Cambridge, pp. 4-103. (English)
  • Y. Engeström: Developing Labor Research. The theory of activity in practice. Translated and edited by Lisa Rosa. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-86541-279-9 .
  • Y. Engeström: Learning through expansion. Published by Falk Seeger. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2011, ISBN 978-3-86541-431-1 .
  • Y. Engeström, J. Lompscher, G. Rückriem (Eds.): Putting activity theory to work: contributions from developmental work research. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2005, ISBN 3-86541-139-8 . (English)
  • Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, among others: Perspectives on activity theory . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999. (English)
  • B. Fichtner: Learning and learning activity. Ontogenetic, phylogenetic and epistemological studies. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-86541-256-0 .
  • H. Giest, J. Lompscher: Learning activity - learning from a cultural-historical perspective. A contribution to the development of a new learning culture in the classroom. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2006, ISBN 3-86541-136-3 .
  • H. Giest, G. Rückriem (ed.): Activity theory and (knowledge) society. Questions and answers from activity theory research and practice. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2010, ISBN 978-3-86541-379-6 .
  • K. Holzkamp: Fundamentals of psychology . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1983.
  • V. Kaptelinin: Activity Theory: Implications for Human-Computer Interaction . 1992. (English)
  • V. Kaptelinin, B. Nardi, among others: The Activity Checklist: A Tool For Representing the "Space" of Context . In: Interactions. July / August 1999, pp. 27-39. (English)
  • M. Korpela, A. Mursu: Means for cooperative work and activity networks: An analytical framework . ECSCW'03, 8th European Conference of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Helsinki, Finland 2003. (English)
  • K. Kuuti: Activity Theory and its application to information system research . Amsterdam 1991. (English)
  • K. Kuuti: Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human-Computer Interaction Research . In BA Nardi (ed.): Context and Consciousness. Cambridge, MA 1996, pp. 17-44. (English)
  • I. Langemeyer, M. Nissen: Activity Theory . In: Bridget Somekh, Cathy Lewin (Eds.): Theory and Methods in Social Research. Sage publications, 2011, pp. 182-189. (English)
  • J. Lompscher: activity - learning activity - teaching strategy. The theory of learning activity and its empirical research. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2007, ISBN 978-3-86541-169-3 .
  • R. Miettinen: Dialogue and Creativity. Activity Theory in the Study of Science, Technology and Innovations . Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2009, ISBN 978-3-86541-348-2 (English)
  • BA Nardi: Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction . The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA) 1996. (English)
  • F. Schapfel: "Critical reception of the Soviet theory of activity and its application." Leuchtturm Verlag, Alsbach / Bergstrasse 1995. (German), free download at: www.ssoar.info
  • A. Stetsenko: Activity as Object-Related: Resolving the Dichotomy of Individual and Collective Planes of Activity . In: Mind, Culture, and Activity. 12 (1), 2005, pp. 70-88. (English)
  • N. Veresov: Marxist and non-Marxist aspects of the cultural-historical psychology of LS Vygotsky . In: OUTLINES. Critical Practice Studies. 2005. (online) (English)
  • JV Wert: The concept of activity in Soviet psychology . New York 1981. (English)

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ TO Leontiev: Activity, Consciousness and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, New York 1978.
  2. ↑ JV Wertsch: The concept of activity in Soviet psychology . New York 1981.
  3. ^ Y. Engeström: Learning by expanding . Orienta Consultit, Helsinki 1987. German translation: Y. Engeström: Learning through expansion. Published by Falk Seeger. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2011, ISBN 978-3-86541-431-1 .
  4. ^ Y. Engeström: Learning, working and imagining: twelve studies in activity theory . Orienta-Konsultit, Helsinki 1990.
  5. ^ BA Nardi: Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction . The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA) 1996.
  6. ^ Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, inter alia: Perspectives on activity theory . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999.
  7. ^ LS Vygotsky: History of the higher mental functions. (Advances in Psychology, Vol. 5). Lit Verlag, Münster 1931/1992.
  8. ↑ LS Vygotsky: Thinking and Speaking. Ed. U. trans. v. J. Lompscher and G. Rückriem. Beltz, Weinheim 1934/2002.
  9. ↑ Cf. Marx-Engels Works Vol. 3, 5; see. Veresov 2005, 40 [1].
  10. ^ AN Leontjew: Problems of the development of the psychic. People and Knowledge, Berlin 1964.
  11. ↑ See also Klaus Holzkamp, ​​1983.
  12. ↑ TO Leont'ev: Activity - Consciousness - Personality . Edited by Georg Rückriem, translated by Elana Hoffmann. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2012.
  13. ↑ V. Kaptelinin: Activity Theory: Implications for Human-Computer Interaction . 1992, pp. 107-109.
  14. ↑ K. Kuuti: Activity Theory as a potential Framework for Human-Computer Interaction Research . In BA Nardi (ed.): Context and Consciousness. Cambridge, MA 1996, p. 26.
  15. ↑ TO Leont'ev: Activity - Consciousness - Personality . Edited by Georg Rückriem, translated by Elana Hoffmann. Lehmanns Media, Berlin 2012.
  16. ↑ V. Kaptelinin: Activity Theory: Implications for Human-Computer Interaction . 1992, p. 107.
  17. ↑ V. Kaptelinin: Activity Theory: Implications for Human-Computer Interaction. 1992, p. 109.

Web links