LiteratureBase
Beyond the Centralized Mindset
Resnick (1996) Beyond the Centralized Mindset
Abstract
- In recent years, there has been a growing fascination with decentralized systems and self-organizing phenomena. Increasingly, people are choosing decentralized models for the organizations and technologies that they construct in the world, and for the theories that they construct about the world. But even as decentralized ideas spread through the culture, there is a deep-seated resistance to such ideas. In trying to understand patterns in the world, people often assume centralized control where none exists (for example, assuming that a “leader bird” guides the rest of the flock). To probe how people think about decentralized systems, and to help them develop new ways of thinking about such systems, I developed a programmable modeling environment (called StarLogo) with which people can easily create and experiment with decentralized systems. StarLogo allows users to control the actions and interactions of thousands of artificial “creatures” on the computer screen. I describe three StarLogo projects created by high-school students. Based on my observations of these (and other) students, I analyze the nature of the centralized mindset, and I discuss how people, through engagement with new types of computational tools and activities, can begin to move beyond the centralized mindset.
- Concepts Decentralized Self, Decentralized thinking, Metacognition, Psychological flexibility, Systems thinking
- Relevant learning goals Conceptual Thinking, Critical Thinking, Metacognitive Competency, Systems Thinking
- Relevant subject areas Philosophy, Psychology, School Improvement
- Relevant research methods Conceptual clarification, Content analysis
- Relevant projects Annotated Reading List, Decentralized Self, Understanding Agency
- Relevant school improvement goals Conceptual pluralism, Conceptual understanding
Related Lesson Materials
Related Literature
- Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is regarded as part of the “third wave” of cognitive- behavioral therapy (CBT) that has emerged over the past quarter century (Hayes, Reference Hayes2004). It is a transdiagnostic approach recognized by Division 12 of the American Psychological Association (Society of Clinical Psychology, n.d.) as having strong research support in the treatment of chronic pain and modest empirical support in addressing depression, mixed anxiety, obsessive–compulsive disorder, and psychosis. Rather than seeking to directly change problematic thoughts, emotions, and other private events, ACT and related approaches within the latest generation of CBT writ large incorporate mindfulness, acceptance, and decentering/defusion strategies to change the function of such psychological events and alter how clients relate to them (Hayes, Luoma, Bond, Masuda, & Lillis, Reference Hayes, Luoma, Bond, Masuda and Lillis2006). Unlike other third-wave approaches such as dialectical behavior therapy (Linehan, Reference Linehan1993), mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT; Segal, Williams, & Teasdale, Reference Segal, Williams and Teasdale2002), and metacognitive therapy (Wells, Reference Wells2009), ACT is unique in (a) being explicitly grounded within a modern pragmatic philosophy of behavioral science known as functional contextualism (Hayes, Reference Hayes, Hayes, Hayes, Reese and Sarbin1993), (b) being informed by relational frame theory as an associated account of human language and cognition (Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, Reference Hayes, Barnes-Holmes and Roche2001), and (c) identifying increased psychological flexibility, or the ability to make behavioral adjustments in the service of one’s values, as its superordinate goal. Some discussion of each of these defining features of ACT is necessary to understand its stance on the self.