Abstract
Changing conceptions of the relation between organisms and their environments make up a crucial chapter in the history of psychology. This may be approached by a comparative study of how schematic diagrams portray this relation. Diagrams drive the communication and the teaching of ideas, the sedimentation of epistemic norms and methods of analysis, and in some cases the articulation of novel concepts through pictographic variants. Through a sampling of schematic representations, I offer a concise comparison of how different authors, with different interests and motivations, have portrayed important aspects of the organism–environment relation. I compare example diagrams according to the features they underscore (or omit) and group them into classes that emphasize interaction, transaction, and constitution loops.
Highlights
There are important convergences between ecological psychology and enaction and differences
In almost every diagram that depicts organisms and their environments, we find arrows going from one to the other
Unlike von Uexküll’s single object, Barker shows various complex processes in the environment: relations between agent and objects both at the proximal level and ecological level. This diagram is animated by a richness of interactions between objects and even the dynamic character of the organism is underlined by a series of small arrows
Summary
There are important convergences between ecological psychology and enaction and differences. Some of these revolve around ways of conceiving the relation between organisms and environments, conceptions that are rooted historically and not always spelled out. In this article I look at a sampling of diagrams that express how different authors have conceived of the relation between organism and environment through the history of psychology. Diagrams are powerful in driving the communication and the teaching of ideas. They help sediment perspectives and are one of the first tools used to approach new problems. Diagrams simplify; they select and they omit What they leave out or distort is part of the narratives they help sustain (Tufte, 1997)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
