Clancey, William (2001) Is Abstraction a Kind of Idea or How Conceptualization Works? [Journal (Paginated)]
Full text available as:
PDF
86Kb |
Abstract
In this commentary, I review papers by Ohlsson & Regan (O&R), van Oers, and Dreyfus, Hershkowitz, & Schwarz (DH&S). The papers are nominally about abstraction and learning, but emphasize different kinds of problems and levels of analysis. O&R focus on mathematical, domain independent characteristics of abstract thinking, claiming that experience in a domain is not the main determinant of scientific discovery. van Oers focuses on the development of abstraction within activities, especially as a sequence of nested domains of concern. DH&S emphasize how nested conceptualizations co-define and provide meaning for each other (a dialectic relation).
Item Type: | Journal (Paginated) |
---|---|
Subjects: | Psychology > Applied Cognitive Psychology |
ID Code: | 1988 |
Deposited By: | Clancey, Bill |
Deposited On: | 03 Jun 2003 |
Last Modified: | 11 Mar 2011 08:54 |
References in Article
Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.
Metadata
- ASCII Citation
- Atom
- BibTeX
- Dublin Core
- EP3 XML
- EPrints Application Profile (experimental)
- EndNote
- HTML Citation
- ID Plus Text Citation
- JSON
- METS
- MODS
- MPEG-21 DIDL
- OpenURL ContextObject
- OpenURL ContextObject in Span
- RDF+N-Triples
- RDF+N3
- RDF+XML
- Refer
- Reference Manager
- Search Data Dump
- Simple Metadata
- YAML
Repository Staff Only: item control page