TY - JOUR
T1 - Disrupting representational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines
AU - Hall, Rogers
AU - Stevens, Reed
AU - Torralba, Tony
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (ESI-94552771) to Hall, a National Academy of Education/Spencer Foundation dissertation fellowship to Stevens, and a University of California Mentored Fellowship award to Torralba. We want to thank participants in the Math@Work Project, Sharon Derry, Charles Goodwin, James Greeno, Leigh Star, and Karen Wieckert for helpful comments on this article.
PY - 2002/8/1
Y1 - 2002/8/1
N2 - In this article, we analyze conversations in consulting meetings where people work across disciplines to design things. We focus on interactional processes through which people disrupt and attempt to change representational technologies for scientific and technical classification. Our case material is drawn from ethnographic and cognitive studies of work in field entomology and architectural design. In both cases, we find common structures of interaction when people work across disciplines. These include selective use of talk, embodied action, and inscription to animate representational states that make up design alternatives. Participants from different disciplines animate situations in strikingly different ways, but these differences can either go unremarked or be put into coordinated use without explicit, shared understandings. Differences become remarkable either when a design proposal runs counter to deeply held disciplinary objectives or threatens to destabilize a wider network of representational technologies. These kinds of disruptions, and their consequences for representational infrastructure, are a central problem for research on distributed cognition.
AB - In this article, we analyze conversations in consulting meetings where people work across disciplines to design things. We focus on interactional processes through which people disrupt and attempt to change representational technologies for scientific and technical classification. Our case material is drawn from ethnographic and cognitive studies of work in field entomology and architectural design. In both cases, we find common structures of interaction when people work across disciplines. These include selective use of talk, embodied action, and inscription to animate representational states that make up design alternatives. Participants from different disciplines animate situations in strikingly different ways, but these differences can either go unremarked or be put into coordinated use without explicit, shared understandings. Differences become remarkable either when a design proposal runs counter to deeply held disciplinary objectives or threatens to destabilize a wider network of representational technologies. These kinds of disruptions, and their consequences for representational infrastructure, are a central problem for research on distributed cognition.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33749240800&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33749240800&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1207/S15327884MCA0903_03
DO - 10.1207/S15327884MCA0903_03
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:33749240800
SN - 1074-9039
VL - 9
SP - 179
EP - 210
JO - Mind, Culture, and Activity
JF - Mind, Culture, and Activity
IS - 3
ER -