Mike: Great lead...am a bit familiar with some of Deanna Kuhn's work, but it
had not occurred to me to think of this as a resource. Will be sure to look
into it...thanks very much! (see, I told you all that this listserv has a
remarkable amount of collective knowledge!). ...Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Palij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Cc: "Mike Palij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 5:12 PM
Subject: [tips] Re: TIPS brain pick
Scott,
I may be completely off-base here but it seems to me that
you might want to look at the "child as scientist" literature.
I believe that Deanna Kuhn's work might be relevant and I
did a quick Google search which turned up the following
article by Brewer that might be relevant to you:
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:FT3Jcg_FmnQJ:www.ruf.rice.edu/~rgrandy/BrewerR.doc+deanna+children+theories+explanation&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
or
http://tinyurl.com/r2fy4
I hope this helps.
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:07:56 -0700, Scott Lilienfeld wrote:
Hi TIPS: I'm writing with a brain pick of sorts. I'm always reluctant to
post to listservs with these kinds of requests. But I've been rather
stymied
in my searches, and am hoping that I can benefit from the remarkable
collective knowledge of this list.
Specifically, I'm wondering if anyone is aware of much good research on
the
development over time of individuals' (children, adolescents, college
students, etc.) understanding of multiple levels of explanation. By this,
I
mean the understanding that psychological phenomenon X can co-exist
simultaneously at several different levels - e.g., that depression can
simultaneously be viewed at the molecular level, physiological level,
psychological level, social level, and so on. I know that as educators,
most
of us have discovered that some of our students "get" this concept,
whereas
others never seem to be able to do so. That is, some of our students
eventually move beyond asking "Is depression biological, or it is
psychological?" and come to understand that it can be conceptualized
profitably at both (and other) levels of understanding, whereas others
don't. Just to be clear, here I'm talking about "vertical" explanation
(explanations at differing levels in Comte's hierarchy of the sciences),
not
"horizontal" explanation (explanations invoking multiple causal factors at
the same level of explanation). Is there any literature on the time course
of this understanding, its domain generality vs. specificity, its
psychological correlates (e.g., IQ, Piagetian stage status), etc.?
I've found some research bearing obliquely on the development of this
understanding over time (e.g., Frank Kiel's work), but not a whole lot
that
addresses it explicitly (PsycInfo searches using "levels of explanation"
and
"development of" and similar terms have been only modestly helpful).
In any case, any pointers, leads, etc. would be immensely appreciated.
Thanks much in advance...Scott
Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Psychology, Room 206
Emory University
532 N. Kilgo Circle
Atlanta, Georgia 30322
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
