Luria And The Cultural-historical Approach In Psychology

In: A.R. Luria and Contemporary Psychology Editors: T. Akhutina et aI., pp. 35-41 ISBN 1-59454-102-7 © 2005 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Chapter 5 A. R. LURIA AND THE CULTURALHISTORICAL ApPROACH IN PSYCHOLOGY! Michael Cole THE ESSENTIAL IDEAS: LURIA AS CULTURAL- HISTORICAL PSYCHOLOGIST If one were to approach a professional rsychologist at an international conference and ask, "Who was Alexander Luria and what was his contribution to psychology," it is overwhelmingly probable that you would be told that Alexander Luria was the "father of neuropsychology," who lived and worked in the Soviet Union in the middle of the twentieth century. There is no doubt that within the sub-discipline of neuropsychology, his methods and sometimes his theories have been widely cited. Even within neuropsychology, he remains a recognizably distinctive figure, as David Tupper has noted (Tupper, 1999). When his methods are actively used, they are also widely modified in ways which would be likely to evoke his disapproval. David Tupper (1999) characterizes Luria's'distinctiveness as follows: Theoretically, Luria attempts to test an overriding metatheory; his approach is synthetic and his data are derived from clinical neurology whereas, North American Neuropsychologists have no overall theory, preferring instead to test specific hypotheses; their approach is analytic and their data are derived from psychometric tests. In terms of assessment techniques, Luria's methods are qualitative and flexible; he seeks links in functional systems, his methods are clinical-theoretical and case oriented. By contrast, North American Neuropsychologists rely on psychometric, actuarial, quantitative, group studies. 1 This article was published in Russian in 2002, titled: A. R. Luria i kulturno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya" In T. V. Akhutina and J. M Glozman (Eds.), Alexander Luria and the Psychology of the XXIst Century: Proceedings of the Second International Luria Memorial Conference (pp. 10-17). Moscow: Department of Psychology at MSU. • Michael Cole 36 These contrasts point squarely at the fact that Luria was, from the beginning, working in a different scientific paradigm than his North American (and many other) colleagues. My own view is that Luria was an extraordinarily broad and ambitious psychological thinker for whom neuropsychology was one, but only one, of many sub-fields to which he made important contributions over a career that lasted more than 50 years. He identified himself as a cultural-historical psychologist, as a follower of Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky, and a colleague of Alexey Leontiev, with whom he set out as a young man to create a synthetic, all-embracing psychology. To understand who Luria was, even if one is only interested in his contributions to neuropsychology, it is necessary to understand him first and foremost as a cultural-historical psychologist, a distinctive paradigm that has gained many adherents world-wide since Luria's death a quarter of a century ago. 80% DCultural Psychology 70% • Development 60% DLanguage 50% 40% D Neuropsychology 30% D Self-Control 20% 10% 0% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996