Elaboration of Cultural-Historical Approach in Developmental and Clinical Psychology: Tendencies and Levels of Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research was focused on the following opportunities of further development of L. S. Vy-gotsky’s cultural-historical approach: 1) further analysis of symbolic mediation methods of mental activity in socially and culturally stratified modern society and 2) cultural-historical analysis use in research of theories and conceptual apparat of clinical psychology. Drawing on performed research, we argue that psychological knowledge should be analyzed in the context of its cultural-historical formation. The application of cultural-historical analysis in di˙erent levels provides an opportunity to extend the methodology used for empirical research including research of certain clinical case. We’ve developed the integrated cultural-historical approach that combines the ideas of L. S. Vygotsky and M. M. Bakhtin complementing psychology of interiorization with psychology of exteriorization. To develop further, modern cultural-historical psychol-ogy needs to extend the “experience” concept and to integrate the experience of depth psychology, inasmuch as an individual develops within the culture, which means, that development is closely related with language and should be analyzed in the context of language and voice dialogues as fundamental conditions of psychological development. Thereby, mental activity is dialogical in its structure – it does not only evolve in dialogue, but is a dialogue at the root as well. Performed research proves L. S. Vygotsky’s idea that normal and abnormal development goes in accordance with the same rules. Moreover, normal and abnormal phenomena intertwine in the midst of empirical development of an individual. Historically divergent phenomena provided an opportunity for extension of normal consciousness that places developmental psychology and pathopsychology in the global phenomenological and historical context of analysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".