Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:31:38.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2024

Yrjö Engeström
Yrjö Engeström
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki

Summary

A summary is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Chapter
Information
Concept Formation in the Wild , pp. 185 - 199
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

References

Ackoff, R. L. (1971). Towards a system of systems concepts. Management Science, 17(11), 661–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackoff, R. L. (1974). Redesigning the future: A systems approach to societal problems. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Alexander, N. B., Galecki, A. T., Grenier, M. L., Nyquist, L. V., Hofmeyer, M. R., Grunawalt, J. C., Medell, J. L., & Fry-Welch, D. (2001). Task-specific resistance training to improve the ability of activities of daily living-impaired older adults to rise from a bed and from a chair. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 49(11), 1418–1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, D. (2009). From boundary concept to boundary object: The practice and politics of care pathway development. Social Science & Medicine, 69(3), 354–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, D. (2014). Lost in translation? Evidence and the articulation of institutional logics in integrated care pathways: From positive to negative boundary object? Sociology of Health & Illness, 36(6), 807–822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, I., & Tulloch, D. (2000). Pathways through homelessness: A review of the research evidence. Edinburgh: Scottish Homes.Google Scholar
Anderson-Baron, J. T., & Collins, D. (2018). Not a “forever model”: The curious case of graduation in Housing First. Urban Geography, 39(4), 587–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arsen’ev, A. S., Bibler, V. S., & Kedrov, B. M. (1967). Analysis of an evolving concept. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].Google Scholar
Baker, T., & Evans, J. (2016). “Housing First” and the changing terrains of homeless governance. Geography Compass, 10(1), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bal, A., Afacan, K., & Cakir, H. I. (2018). Culturally responsive school discipline: Implementing Learning Lab at a high school for systemic transformation. American Educational Research Journal, 55(5), 1007–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, A., Smith, B., Lord, S. R., Williams, M., & Baumand, A. (2003). Community-based group exercise improves balance and reduces falls in at-risk older people: A randomized controlled trial. Age and Ageing, 32(4), 407–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartunek, J. M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazerman, C. (2018). What does a model model? And for whom? Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, R. C. (2016). Designing business model innovations: A multi-level perspective. In Proceedings of the 17th International CINet Conference: Innovation and Tradition: Combining the Old and the New, Turin, Italy (pp. 11–13).Google Scholar
Bell, J. (2003). Concept car design: Driving the dream. Hove: Rotovision.Google Scholar
Benson, M. H., & Craig, R. K. (2014). The end of sustainability. Society & Natural Resources, 27(7), 777–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, M. (1997). Rationalizing medical work: Decision-support techniques and medical practices. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Blunden, A. (2012). Concepts: A critical approach. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohannon, R. W., Barreca, S. R., Shove, M. E., Lambert, C., Masters, L. M., & Sigouin, C. S. (2008). Documentation of daily sit-to-stands performed by community-dwelling adults. Physiotherapy: Theory and Practice, 24(6), 437–442.Google ScholarPubMed
Boockvar, K. S., & Meier, D. E. (2006). Palliative care for frail older adults: “There are things I can’t do anymore that I wish I could …” The Journal of the American Medical Association, 296, 2245–2253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bothello, J., & Salles-Djelic, M. L. (2018). Evolving conceptualizations of organizational environmentalism: A path generation account. Organization Studies, 39(1), 93–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowker, G., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratus, B. S., & Lishin, O. V. (1983). Laws of the development of activity and problems in the psychological and pedagogical shaping of the personality. Russian Education and Society, 21(3), 38–50.Google Scholar
Brock, D. M., Powell, M. J., & Hinings, C. B. (2007). Archetypal change and the professional service firm. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 16, 221–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brook, C., Pedler, M., Abbott, C., & Burgoyne, J. (2016). On stopping doing those things that are not getting us to where we want to be: Unlearning, wicked problems and critical action learning. Human Relations, 69(2), 369–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, R. A. (1991). Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence, 47(1–3), 139–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, H., Krinsky, J., Brunila, M., & Ranta, K. (2019). Learning to common, commoning as learning. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies, 18(6), 1207–1233.Google Scholar
Campbell, D., Coldicott, T., & Kinsella, K. (2018). Systemic work with organizations: A new model for managers and change agents. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, L. (2011). The hunting of the snark. London: Tate Publishing.Google Scholar
Carvalho, M. J., Marques, E., & Mota, J. (2008). Training and detraining effects on functional fitness after a multicomponent training in older women. Gerontology, 55(1), 41–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casas-Cortés, M. I., Osterweil, M., & Powell, D. A. (2008). Blurring boundaries: Recognizing knowledge-practices in the study of social movements. Anthropological Quarterly, 81, 17–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamberlain, C., & Johnson, G. (2013). Pathways into adult homelessness. Journal of Sociology, 49(1), 60–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2007). Learning for action: A short definitive account of soft systems methodology, and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Chemero, A. (2013). Radical embodied cognitive science. Review of General Psychology, 17(2), 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia, R. C., & Holt, R. (2009). Strategy without design: The silent efficacy of indirect action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, R. E. (1999). Managing quality fads: How American business learned to play the quality game. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cussins, A. (1992). Content, embodiment and objectivity: The theory of cognitive trails. Mind, 101, 651–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cussins, A. (1993). Nonconceptual content and the elimination of misconceived composites! Mind & Language, 8, 234–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daiute, C., & Nelson, K. (1997). Making sense of the sense-making. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Alisa, G., Demaria, F., & Kallis, G. (eds.) (2014). Degrowth: A vocabulary for a new era. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danish, J. A., Enyedy, N., Saleh, A., & Humburg, M. (2020). Learning in embodied activity framework: A sociocultural framework for embodied cognition. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15, 49–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dara, S. K. (2019). The new integrated pest management paradigm for the modern age. Journal of Integrated Pest Management, 10(1), 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davydov, V. V. (1988). Problems of developmental teaching: The experience of theoretical and experimental psychological research. Excerpts (Part II). Soviet Education, 30(9), 3–83.Google Scholar
Davydov, V. V. (1990). Types of generalization in instruction: Logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school curricula. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
Davydov, V. V. (2008). Problems of developmental instruction: A theoretical and experimental psychological study. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Deguine, J. P., Aubertot, J. N., Flor, R. J., Lescourret, F., Wyckhuys, K. A., & Ratnadass, A. (2021). Integrated pest management: Good intentions, hard realities. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 41(3), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delmestri, G., Wezel, F. C., Goodrick, E., & Washington, M. (2020). The hidden paths of category research: Climbing new heights and slippery slopes. Organization Studies, 41(7) 909–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, J. A., & Fallon, L. A. (1989). The concept of sustainability: Origins, extensions, and usefulness for policy. Society & Natural Resources, 2(1), 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, T. E. (2010). Revisiting adhocracy: From rhetorical revisionism to smart mobs. Journal of Futures Studies, 15(2), 33–50.Google Scholar
Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Duijn, S., Zonneveld, N., Montero, A. L., Minkman, M., & Nies, H. (2018). Service integration across sectors in Europe: Literature and practice. International Journal of Integrated Care, 18(2), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunlop, T. (2022). Energy efficiency: The evolution of a motherhood concept. Social Studies of Science, 52(5), 710–732.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durand, R., Granqvist, N., & Tyllström, A. (2017). From categories to categorization: A social perspective on market categorization. In Durand, R., Granqvist, N., & Tyllström, A. (eds.), From categories to categorization: Studies in sociology, organizations and strategy at the crossroads (pp. 3–30). Bingley: Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edsall, L. (2003). Concept cars: From the 1930s to the present. Lyndhurst: Barnes & Noble.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1995a) Innovative organizational learning in medical and legal settings. In Martin, L., Nelson, K., & Tobach, E., (eds.), Theory and practice of doing: Sociocultural psychology (pp. 326–356). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1995b). Objects, contradictions and collaboration in medical cognition: An activity-theoretical perspective. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 7, 395–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engeström, Y. (2003). The horizontal dimension of expansive learning: Weaving a texture of cognitive trails in the terrain of health care in Helsinki. In Achtenhagen, F., & John, E. G., (eds.), Milestones of vocational and occupational education and training. Volume 1: The teaching-learning perspective (pp. 152–179). Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2005a). Developmental work research: Expanding activity theory in practice. Berlin: Lehmanns Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2005b). Introduction: In search of the Sampo. In Engeström, Y. (ed.), Developmental work research: Expanding activity theory in practice (pp. 9–14). Berlin: Lehmanns Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2007a). From stabilization knowledge to possibility knowledge in organizational learning. Management Learning, 38(3), 271–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2007b). Putting Vygotsky to work: The Change Laboratory as an application of double stimulation. In Daniels, H., Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. V. (eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 363–382). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2008a). From teams to knots: Activity-theoretical studies of collaboration and learning at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2008b). Quand le centre se dérobe: La notion de knotworking et ses promesses. Sociologie du Travail, 50(3), 303–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2009). Wildfire activities: New patterns of mobility and learning. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 1(2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2011). From design experiments to formative interventions. Theory & Psychology, 21(5), 598–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2016). Studies in expansive learning: Learning what is not yet there. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2018). Expertise in transition: Expansive learning in medical work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2020). Concept formation in the wild: Towards a research agenda. Éducation et Didactique, 14(14-2), 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (2023). Writing for stabilization and writing for possibility: The dialectics of representation in everyday work with vulnerable clients. In Rogers, P. M., Russell, D., Carlino, P., & Marine, J. M. (eds), Writing as a human activity: Implications and applications of the work of Charles Bazerman (pp. 293–314). Fort Collins: The WAC Clearinghouse.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Brunila, M., & Rantavuori, J. (2024). The politics of expansive learning: A study of two social movements. In Levant, A., Murakami, K., & McSweeney, M. (eds.), Activity theory: An introduction (pp. 137–172). Stuttgart: Ibidem Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5 , 319–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Vähäaho, T. (1999). When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking. In Chaiklin, S., Hedegaard, M., & Jensen, U. J. (eds.), Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 12–30). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y., Kaatrakoski, H., Kaiponen, P., Lahikainen, J., Laitinen, A., Myllys, H., Rantavuori, J., & Sinikara, K. (2012). Knotworking in academic libraries: Two case studies from the University of Helsinki. Liber Quarterly, 21(3/4), 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Kajamaa, A., Lahtinen, P., & Sannino, A. (2015). Toward a grammar of collaboration. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 22(2), 92–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Kajamaa, A., & Nummijoki, J. (2015). Double stimulation in everyday work: Critical encounters between home care workers and their elderly clients. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 4, 48–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. (eds.) (1996). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Nummijoki, J., & Sannino, A. (2012). Embodied germ cell at work: Building an expansive concept of physical mobility in home care. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(3), 287–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Pasanen, A., Toiviainen, H., & Haavisto, V. (2005). Expansive learning as collaborative concept formation at work. In Yamazumi, K., Engeström, Y., & Daniels, H. (eds.), New learning challenges: Going beyond the industrial age system of school and work (pp. 47–77). Kansai: Kansai University Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y., Rantavuori, J., & Kerosuo, H. (2013). Expansive learning in a library: Actions, cycles and deviations from instructional intentions. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2012a). Concept formation in the wild. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(3), 201–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2012b). Whatever happened to process theories of learning? Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2013). La volition et l’agentivité transformatrice: Perspective théorique de l’activité. Revue Internationale du CRIRES: Innover dans la tradition de Vygotsky, 1(1), 4–19.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2021). From mediated actions to heterogenous coalitions: Four generations of activity-theoretical studies of work and learning. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 28(1), 4–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Sannino, A., & Virkkunen, J. (2014). On the methodological demands of formative interventions. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(2), 118–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y., Virkkunen, J., Helle, M., Pihlaja, J., & Poikela, R. (1996). The Change Laboratory as a tool for transforming work. Lifelong Learning in Europe, 1(2), 10–17.Google Scholar
Englund, C. (2018). Exploring interdisciplinary academic development: The Change Laboratory as an approach to team-based practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(4), 698–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahlman, M. M., Topp, R, McNevin, N., Morgan, A. L., & Boardley, D. J. (2007). Structured exercise in older adults with limited functional ability. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 33(6), 32–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falmagne, R. J. (1995). The abstract and the concrete. In Martin, L. W., Nelson, K., & Tobach, E. (eds.), Sociocultural psychology: Theory and practice of doing and knowing (pp. 205–228). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, S., Bramley, G., & Johnsen, S. (2013). Pathways into multiple exclusion homelessness in seven UK cities. Urban Studies, 50(1), 148–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogel, A. (1993). Developing through relationships: Origins of communication, self, and culture. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fogg, B. J. (2003). Conceptual designs. In Laurel, B. (ed.), Design research: Methods and perspectives (pp. 201–211). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Foot, K. A. (2001). Cultural-historical activity theory as practice theory: Illuminating the development of conflict-monitoring network. Communication Theory, 11(1), 56–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, S. (2005). How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2005). Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey, T. (1998). Conceptual art. London: Phaidon Press.Google Scholar
Goodland, R. (1995). The concept of environmental sustainability. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 26(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, N. (1978). Ways of worldmaking. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J. G. (2012). Concepts in activities and discourses. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(3), 310–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J. G., & van de Sande, C. (2007). Perspectival understanding of conceptions and conceptual growth in interaction. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenstein, D. (2010). Strategies for sustaining the university library. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 10(2), 121–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gromyko, Y. (1997) Organizational activity games. Moscow: Independent Methodological University [in Russian].Google Scholar
Haapasaari, A., Engeström, Y., & Kerosuo, H. (2014). The emergence of learners’ transformative agency in a Change Laboratory intervention. Journal of Education and Work, 29(2), 232–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannan, M. T. et al. (2019). Concepts and categories: Foundations for sociological and cultural analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haug, W. F. (1974). Vorlesungen zur Einführung ins Kapital. Köln: Pahl-Rugenstein.Google Scholar
Heusinkveld, S., & Benders, J. (2012). On sedimentation in management fashion: An institutional perspective. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(1), 121–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holzkamp, K. (1993). Lernen: Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlegung. Frankfurt am Main: Campus-Verlag [in German].Google Scholar
Hubbard, L., Mehan, H., & Stein, M. K. (2006). Reform as learning: School reform, organizational culture, and community politics in San Diego. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hunter, B., & Segrott, J. (2014). Renegotiating inter‐professional boundaries in maternity care: Implementing a clinical pathway for normal labour. Sociology of Health & Illness, 36(5), 719–737.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E. (2005). Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(10), 1555–1577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E. (2010). Enaction, imagination, and insight. In Stewart, J., Gapenne, O., & Di Paolo, E. A. (eds.), Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science (pp. 425–450). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutto, D., & Myin, E. (2017). Evolving enactivism: Basic minds meet content. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Il’enkov, E. V. (1977). Dialectical logic: Essays on its theory and history. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Il’enkov, E. V. (1982). The dialectics of the abstract and the concrete in Marx’s Capital. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ingold, T. (2007). Lines: A brief history. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M. C. (2006). Creative holism: A critical systems approach to complex problem situations. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 23(5), 647–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, U. J. (1983). Sygdomsbegreber i praksis: Det kliniske arbejdes filosofi og videnskabsteori. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Johnston, E. R. (2020). Pathologizing the wounded? Post-traumatic stress disorder in an era of gun violence. Rhetoric of Health & Medicine, 3(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R. (2007). A journey through the years: Ageing and social care. Ageing Horizons, 6 , 42–51.Google Scholar
Joutsenlahti, S. (2022). Asunnottomien tarpeiden ymmärtäminen palvelukehityksen perustaksi. In Fredriksson, P. (ed.), Loppu asunnottomuudelle: Suoja-Pirtti ry:n 60-vuotisen toiminnan juhlajulkaisu (pp. 60–64). Helsinki: Suoja-Pirtti ry [in Finnish].Google Scholar
Jutel, A. (2010). Medically unexplained symptoms and the disease label. Social Theory & Health, 8, 229–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaakinen, J. (May 6, 2019). Housing first: How Finland is ending homelessness. The OECD Observer, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaatrakoski, H., & Lahikainen, J. (2016). “What we do every day is impossible”: Managing change by developing a knotworking culture in an academic library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(5), 515–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallis, G., Kostakis, V., Lange, S., Muraca, B., Paulson, S., & Schmelzer, M. (2018). Research on degrowth. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 43(1), 291–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karppinen, J. (2022). Entä jos en pärjää omassa asunnossa? In Fredriksson, P. (ed.), Loppu asunnottomuudelle: Suoja-Pirtti ry:n 60-vuotisen toiminnan juhlajulkaisu (pp. 55–57). Helsinki: Suoja-Pirtti ry [in Finnish].Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, C. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keil, F. C. (1992). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kerosuo, H., & Engeström, Y. (2003). Boundary crossing and learning in creation of new work practice. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 345–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkpatrick, I., & Ackroyd, S. (2003). Archetype theory and the changing professional organization: A critique and alternative. Organization, 10(4), 731–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogan, M. (1998). Integrated pest management: Historical perspectives and contemporary developments. Annual Review of Entomology, 43, 243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koselleck, R., & Presner, T. S. (2002). The practice of conceptual history: Timing history, spacing concepts. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostiainen, E. (2015). Pathways through homelessness in Helsinki. European Journal of Homelessness, 9(2), 63–86.Google Scholar
Krebs, D. E., Scarborough, D. M., McGibbon, C. A. (2007). Functional vs. strength training in disabled elderly outpatients. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 86(2), 93–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kvenild, C., & Calkins, K. (eds.) (2011). Embedded librarians: Moving beyond one-shot instruction. Chicago, IL: Association of College and Research Libraries.Google Scholar
Lamberts, K., & Shanks, D. R. (eds.) (1997). Knowledge, concepts, and categories. Hove: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latouche, S. (2009). Farewell to growth. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Leal Filho, W. (2000). Dealing with misconceptions on the concept of sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 1 , 9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of the mind. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Lindgren, A. (2020). Pippi in the South Seas. Translated by Susan Beard. New York: Puffin Books.Google Scholar
Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, mind and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human sense-making. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Lord, S. R., Murray, S. M., Chapman, K., Munro, B., & Tiedemann, A. (2002). Sit-to-stand performance depends on sensation, speed, balance and psychological status in addition to strength in older people. Journal of Gerontology, 57, 539–543.Google ScholarPubMed
Löwy, I. (1992). The strength of loose concepts - boundary concepts, federative experimental strategies, and disciplinary growth: The case of immunology. History of Science, 30, 371–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchand, T. H. (2010). Making knowledge: Explorations of the indissoluble relation between minds, bodies, and environment. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 16, S1–S21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mareschal, D., Quinn, P. C., & Lea, S. E. G. (eds.) (2010). The making of human concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, E., & Laurence, S. (eds.) (1999). Concepts: Core readings. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marková, I. (2003). Dialogicality and social representations: The dynamics of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marková, I. (2012). Objectification in common sense thinking. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(3), 207–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, J. D., & Toffel, M. W. (2005). Framing the elusive concept of sustainability: A sustainability hierarchy. Environmental Science & Technology, 39(3), 673–682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, G. P., Kocman, D., Stephens, T., Peden, C. J., Pearse, R. M. (2017). Pathways to professionalism? Quality improvement, care pathways, and the interplay of standardisation and clinical autonomy. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(8), 1314–1329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mead, G. H. (1899). The working hypothesis in social reform. American Journal of Sociology, 5(3), 367–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melville, H. (1949). Moby Dick. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Meyer, J., & Land, R. (2003). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (1): Linkages to ways of thinking and practicing within the disciplines (pp. 412–424). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In Farr, R. and Moscovici, S. (eds.), Social representations (pp. 3–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mukute, M., Mudokwani, K., McAllister, G., & Nyikahadzoi, K. (2018). Exploring the potential of developmental work research and change laboratory to support sustainability transformations: a case study of organic agriculture in Zimbabwe. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 25(3), 229–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, G. L. (2002). The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muutoslaboratoriotyöryhmä (2020). Asunto Ensin 2.0 – Tehdään yhdessä jokaiselle mahdollisuus. https://asuntoensin.fi/asunto-ensin-2-0-tehdaan-yhdessa-jokaiselle-mahdollisuus/ [in Finnish].Google Scholar
Namian, D. (2020). Governing homelessness through instruments: A critical perspective on Housing First’s policy instrumentation. Critical Policy Studies, 14(3), 303–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Audit Office’s Report (2010). Vanhuspalvelut. Säännöllinen kotihoito [Services for older citizens: Regular home care]. Helsinki: Valtiontalouden tarkastusvirasto. [National Audit Office] ISBN 978-952-499-153-7 [in Finnish].Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1983). The derivation of concepts and categories from event representations. In Scholnick, E. K. (ed.), New trends in conceptual representation: Challenges to Piaget’s theory? (pp. 131–149). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. (2012). Engineering concepts: The interplay between concept formation and modeling practices in bioengineering sciences. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(3), 222–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolai, A., & Dautwiz, J. (2010). Fuzziness in action: What consequences has the linguistic ambiguity of the core competence concept for organizational usage? British Journal of Management, 21(4), 874–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nummijoki, J. (2020). Breaking new ground in home care encounters: Shared transformative agency between home care workers and their elderly clients. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Faculty of Educational Sciences.Google Scholar
Nummijoki, J., & Engeström, Y. (2010). Towards co-configuration in home care of the elderly: Cultivating agency by designing and implementing the mobility agreement. In Daniels, H., Edwards, A., Engeström, Y., Gallagher, T., & Ludvigsen, S. (eds.), Activity theory in practice: Promoting learning across boundaries and agencies (pp. 49–71). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. (1994). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborne, M. (2019). Who gets “housing first”? Determining eligibility in an era of housing first homelessness. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 48(3), 402–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinder, R., Petchey, R., Shaw, S., & Carter, Y. (2005). What’s in a care pathway? Towards a cultural cartography of the new NHS. Sociology of Health & Illness, 27(6), 759–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pleace, N. (2016). Researching homelessness in Europe: Theoretical perspectives. European Journal of Homelessness, 10(3), 20–44.Google Scholar
Pleace, N., Culhane, D., Granfelt, R., & Knutagård, M. (2015). The Finnish homelessness strategy: An international review. Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment.Google Scholar
Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland; Or, why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all, this being a saga of the Economic Development Administration as told by two sympathetic observers who seek to build morals on a foundation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Prinz, J., & Clark, A. (2004). Putting concepts to work: Some thoughts for the twentyfirst century. Mind & Language, 19(1), 57–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyyvaara, U., & Timonen, A. (eds.) (2017). Naamat [Faces]. Helsinki: Into [in Finnish].Google Scholar
Radford, L. (2020). Davydov’s concept of the concept and its dialectical materialist background. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 106(3), 327–342. [https://doi.org/10.1007/CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasmussen, E. B. (2020). Making and managing medical anomalies: Exploring the classification of ‘medically unexplained symptoms’. Social Studies of Science, 50(6), 901–931.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Renn, O., Jager, A., Deuschle, J., & Weimer-Jehle, W. (2009). A normative-functional concept of sustainability and its indicators. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 9(4), 291–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, M., & Holwell, S. (eds.) (2020). Systems approaches to making change: A practical guide. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rissanen, P. et al. (2020). Social and healthcare services in Finland 2018: Expert evaluation. Helsinki: Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-343-503-2Google Scholar
Robbins, P., & Aydede, M. (eds.) (2008). The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rogoff, B. E., & Lave, J. E. (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In Rosch, E., & Lloyd, B. B. (eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1999). Reclaiming concepts. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(11–12), 61–77.Google Scholar
Rosie, J., & Taylor, D. (2007). Sit-to-stand as home exercise for mobility-limited adults over 80 years of age: GrandStand SystemTM may keep you standing? Age and Ageing, 36(5), 555–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rycroft‐Malone, J., Fontenla, M., Seers, K., & Bick, D. (2009). Protocol‐based care: The standardisation of decision‐making? Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1490–1500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Sannino, A. (2008). Experiencing conversations: Bridging the gap between discourse and activity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 38(3), 267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A. (2011). Activity theory as an activist and interventionist theory. Theory & Psychology, 21(5), 571–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A. (2015). The principle of double stimulation: A path to volitional action. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 6, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A. (2016). Double stimulation in the waiting experiment with collectives: Testing a Vygotskian model of the emergence of volitional action. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50(1), 142–173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sannino, A. (2020). Enacting the utopia of eradicating homelessness: Toward a new generation of activity-theoretical studies of learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 42(2), 163–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A. (2022). Transformative agency as warping: How collectives accomplish change amidst uncertainty. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 30(1), 9–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A., & Engeström, Y. (2017). Co-generation of societally impactful knowledge in Change Laboratories. Management Learning, 48(1), 80–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A., & Engeström, Y. (2018). Valuable innovations out of nonsense? Expansive organizational learning and transformative agency in the Mann Gulch disaster and in the Finnish homelessness strategy. Teoria e Prática em Administração (TPA), 8(2), 60–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Jokinen, E. (2021). Digital peer learning for transformative professional agency: The case of homelessness practitioners in Finland. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(4), 1612–1628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Kärki, E. (2023). Multiprofessional mobile support for overcoming homelessness: A study of Nopsajalka work in Jyväskylä. Tampere: Tampere University, Faculty of Education and Culture.Google Scholar
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Lahikainen, J. (2016). The dialectics of authoring expansive learning: Tracing the long tail of a Change Laboratory. Journal of Workplace Learning, 28(4), 245–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Lemos, M. (2016). Formative interventions for expansive learning and transformative agency. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 599–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannino, A., & Laitinen, A. (2015). Double stimulation in the waiting experiment: Testing a Vygotskian model of the emergence of volitional action. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 4, 4–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, G., van Hoorn, A., & Huiskes, N. (2012). The care pathway: Concepts and theories: an introduction. International Journal of Integrated Care, 12, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of learning organization. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Senge, P. M., & Sterman, J. D. (1992). Systems thinking and organizational learning: Acting locally and thinking globally in the organization of the future. European Journal of Operational Research, 59(1), 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shank, R., & Abelson, R. A. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Shinn, M., & Khadduri, J. (2020). How Finland ended homelessness. Cityscape, 22(2), 75–80.Google Scholar
Shotter, J. (2011). Embodiment, abduction, and expressive movement: A new realm of inquiry? Theory & Psychology, 21(4), 439–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shumaker, D. (2012). The embedded librarian: Innovative strategies for taking knowledge where it’s needed. Medford: Information Today.Google Scholar
Shumway-Cook, A., Silver, I. F., LeMier, M., York, S., Cummings, P., & Koepsell, T. D. (2007). Effectiveness of a community-based multifactorial intervention on falls and fall risk factors in community-living older adults: A randomized, controlled trial. Journals of Gerontology, Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 62(12), 1420–1427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somers, M. R. (1995). What’s political or cultural about political culture and the public sphere? Toward an historical sociology of concept formation. Sociological Theory, 13(2), 113–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 9, 387–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, J., Gapenne, O., & Di Paolo, E. A. (eds.) (2010). Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strait, J. R., & Lima, M. (eds.) (2023). The future of service-learning: New solutions for sustaining and improving practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. L., Fagerhaugh, S., Suczek, B., & Wiener, C. (1982). The work of hospitalized patients. Social Science & Medicine, 16(9), 977–986.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sunikka, S. (2016). Hietsussa yöpyneiden asunnottomuuspolut: Liikkuvuus asunnottomuuden ja asuntoväestön välillä. Licentiate thesis. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Faculty of Social Sciences [in Finnish].Google Scholar
Sverdrup, H., & Svensson, M. G. (2004). Defining the concept of sustainability: A matter of systems thinking and applied systems analysis. In Olsson, M.-O., & Sjöstedt, G. (eds.), Systems approaches and their application (pp. 143–164). New York: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tainio, H., & Fredriksson, P. (2009). The Finnish homelessness strategy: From a ‘staircase’model to a ‘housing first’ approach to tackling long-term homelessness. European Journal of Homelessness, 3, 181–199.Google Scholar
Tampereen kaupunki (2020). Asunnotomuuden puolittamisen toimenpideohjelma 2020-2022. https://www.tampere.fi/material/attachments/uutiskeskus/tampere/a/BerGXBUep/asunnottomuuden_puolittamisen_toimenpideohjelma.pdf (16.9.2021; in Finnish).Google Scholar
Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding: The collective use and evolution of concepts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Toulmin, S. (1999). The idol of stability. In Peterson, G. B. (ed.), The Tanner lectures on human values (vol. 20, pp. 325–354). Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Triste, L., Vandenabeele, J., Lauwers, L., & Marchand, F. (2020). Strategies for expansive learning in sustainable farming initiatives: A CHAT analysis of a Dutch case. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 18(5), 392–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsemberis, S. (2010). Housing First: The pathways model to end homelessness for people with mental health and substance use disorders. Center City: Hazelden Publishing.Google Scholar
Tulle, E. (2004). Old age and agency. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Turnbull, D. (2000). Masons, tricksters and cartographers: Comparative studies in the sociology of scientific and indigenous knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vänninen, I., Pereira-Querol, M., & Engeström, Y. (2015). Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming integrated pest management. Agricultural Systems, 139, 38–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vänninen, I., Querol, M. P., & Engeström, Y. (2021). Double stimulation for collaborative transformation of agricultural systems: The role of models for building agency. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 30, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varela, F. J. Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasilyuk, F. (1988). The psychology of experiencing. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Vergne, J. P., & Swain, G. (2017). Categorical anarchy in the UK? The British media’s classification of bitcoin and the limits of categorization. In Durand, R., Granqvist, N., & Tyllström, A. (eds.), From categories to categorization: Studies in sociology, organizations and strategy at the crossroads (pp. 187–222). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Vidal-Gomel, C., & Rogalski, J. (2007). La conceptualisation et la place des concepts pragmatiques dans l’activité professionnelle et le développement des compétences. Activités, 4(1), 49–84.Google Scholar
Virkkunen, J., & Newnham, D. S. (2013). The Change Laboratory: A tool for collaborative development of work and education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vosniadou, S. (2007). Conceptual change and education. Human Development, 50(1), 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987a). The problem of will and its development in childhood. In Rieber, R. W., & Carton, A. S. (eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1. Problems of General Psychology (pp. 351–358). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987b). Thinking and speech. In Rieber, R. W., & Carton, A. S. (eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1: Problems of general psychology (pp. 39–287). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The development of thinking and concept formation in adolescence. In van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 185–265). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). Self-control. In Rieber, R. W. (ed.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 4: The history of the development of higher mental functions (pp. 207–219). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Wartofsky, M. W. (1978). Models: Representation and the scientific understanding. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Waterman, A. S. (ed.) (2014). Service-learning: Applications from the research. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 24(4), 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 , 357–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiesel, I. (2014). Mobilities of disadvantage: The housing pathways of low-income Australians. Urban Studies, 51(2), 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinchenko, V. P. (1985). Vygotsky’s ideas about units for the analysis of mind. In Wertsch, J. V. (ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 94–118). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2010). Business model design: An activity system perspective. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 216–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Yrjö Engeström, University of Helsinki
  • Book: Concept Formation in the Wild
  • Online publication: 13 June 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009030021.011
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Yrjö Engeström, University of Helsinki
  • Book: Concept Formation in the Wild
  • Online publication: 13 June 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009030021.011
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Yrjö Engeström, University of Helsinki
  • Book: Concept Formation in the Wild
  • Online publication: 13 June 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009030021.011
Available formats
×