Sociocultural perspectives: Rommetveit’s position

1. Sociocultural perspectives: Rommetveit’s position Anders Mørch and Sisse Finken TOOL 5100/INF 5200, 20.02.07

2. Outline • The topics addressed by Rommetveit • Background and assumptions • Organization of the paper • Unit of analysis (linguistic utterances) • Intersubjectivity and related terms • Methodological concerns • What computers can’t do • A new foundation for design • What computers can do: Implications for CSCL

3. The topics addressed by Rommetveit • He gives a critique of the cognitive science approach to meaning making • Presents the dialogical alternative, referred to as the social cognitive approach • Treats these two approaches as different paradigms of human cognition and commutation • By this Rommetveit aims at a “thorough analysis of socially negotiated perspective fixation” to arrive at a “socially negotiated contextual specification” as a shared state of affairs

4. Background and assumptions • Many cited as well as un-cited assumptions make the paper hard to grasp in its entirety • Rommetveit engages in many dialogs with previous scholars (intertextuality at work) • When it comes to scientific method • Kuhn, Popper, Wittgenstein, Feyerabend

5. Key concepts • Perspective • Used when negotiating meaning • Multiple (speakers, listener) perspectives • Position • I assume this relates to the approach of presenting hypotheses and statements (summarizing his understanding in 24 theses) • Aspect • Adopted from Wittgenstein (dawning of an aspect) • Think of particle/wave duality of light

6. Further distinctions • Monological approach • Associated with the cognitive science, thought is monologue with one self • Thought can be modeled to high accuracy and the computer is well equipped for thus purpose • Key proponents: Simon and Newell; Anderson • Dialogical approach • Mind embedded in a social context and mediated by a cultural collective • Additional proponents: Wertsch; Säljö

7. Key ideas and adoptions • Kuhn on paradigm • Rommetveit proposes the dialogical approach as a new paradigm of human cognition and communication • Wittgenstein on language use • the meaning of a word is in its use • Popper on multiple worlds • Rommetveit suggests intersubjectivity as a “fourth world” (physical, mental, objective, intersubjective) • Feyerabend on method • It is unclear to me what methodology means to Rommetveit

8. Key ideas and adoptions cont’d • Social construction of reality (Berger and Luckmann) • Shared social reality (this is the ground for intersubjectivity) • Prerequisite: social interaction and shared situations • Note: It is unclear to me how this term is related to Engeström’s notion of object • They seem to be related but there are no cross-referencing between the two! • Rommetveit is primarily concerned with abstract (linguistic) objects

9. The problem of AI • AI (Artificial Intelligence) is the “demon lurking in the background” when I read the paper ;-) • It is true that AI has had an enormous influence on cognitive science and computer science • The influence is more apparent with respect to methodology and less with respect to theory • Today AI techniques has been adopted in programming languages and search engines

10. Organization of the paper • The paper is argumentative and presents a position (set of theses) and gives both empirical and conceptual justifications for its claims • Empirical support in terms for examples (spoken utterances) and conceptual support in terms of summarizing and referencing previous work • It argues in support of the dialogical (socio-cognitive) approach and against the cognitive science (information processing) approach • The computer does not play a significant role except as reference (modeling device) in the cognitive approach

11. Organization cont’d • The list of 24 thesis is hard to read by themselves, but they make more sense once one has read through the paper • The provide a summary of 30 years of research in these issues

12. Unit of analysis (linguistic utterances) • Also referred to as “micro analysis” • Empirical examples, including • Mr. Smith is WORKING this morning, he is mowing the lawn” (uttered to Betty) • “Mr. Smith is NOT WORKING this morning, he is mowing the lawn” (uttered to Mr. Jones) • “Engage in physical exercise” (an alternative interpretation of Mr. Smith‘s intention for cutting the grass)

13. Intersubjectivity and related terms • Intersubjectivity • Spoken utterances driven by speaker and listener’s goal of “mutual attunement,” reaching for and contributing to a shared social reality (external state of affairs) • Not private (subjective), nor public (objective), but shared by two or more people who (get to) know(s) each other • Grounding (e.g. Clark) • This is related to intersubjectivity but not the same as it

14. Multiple worlds • Popper would say • Physical • Subjective (mental, cognitive) • Objective (world of shared ideas) • Rommetveit would add • Intersubjective (my interpretation) • Other ..

15. Methodological concerns • Rommetveit uses a sociocultural-linguistic approach to get at intersubjective experience • Performs micro analysis at the level of utterances • It is unclear where his empirical examples come from and the rationale for leisure activity as inquiry domain (rather than work or learning) • He does not take into account gestures and other nonverbal signals, as in interaction analysis • It is also different from macro approaches to analysis such as Activity theory (which uses the activity as unit of analysis)

16. What computers can’t do • He is concerned about the limitations of computers seen from the point of view og cognition (referring to Hubert Dreyfuss) • The computer can not capture contextual relationships in the same way humans do • By this he is pointing out the limitations of the representational (cognitive information processing) approach to modeling human cognition

17. A new foundation for design • He is referencing Winograd and Flores on this • They are also criticizing the information processing approach to human cognition • Instead they suggest a theory-informed approach that builds on, among others, on speech act theory • The critique and the suggestions are not properly aligned according to Rommetveit (and me) • Example: The Coordinator system in CSCW

18. What computers can do: Implications for CSCL • The computer can be seen as an information processing machine (in fact it is built as such) and as a modeling device (simulation) • From the point of use it can also be seen as a mediating artifact not unlike many other tools we interact with in everyday life • Concrete tools (chairs, pencils, screens) • Abstract tools (language, symbols, ideas)

19. Relevance to CSCW and CSCL • Interaction thought shared spaces (Ellis et al; Bannon & Bødker) such as forums can be explained by aspects of Rommetveitian (and related) terms • Intersubjectivity and grounding (Clark) • Interobjectivity (Engeström) • Intertextuality (post modern writings) • Micro third world objects (Ludvigsen & Mørch, 2003)