Difference between revisions of "Carlin2017"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Andrew Carlin; |Title=Navigating the walkways: Radical inquiries and mental maps |Tag(s)=EMCA; Walking; Mental; |Key=Carlin2017 |Yea...") |
AndrewCarlin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Andrew Carlin; | + | |Author(s)=Andrew Carlin; |
| − | |Title=Navigating the walkways: Radical inquiries and mental maps | + | |Title=Navigating the walkways: Radical inquiries and mental maps |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Walking; Mental; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Walking; Mental; Foundationalism; Public Space; |
|Key=Carlin2017 | |Key=Carlin2017 | ||
|Year=2017 | |Year=2017 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Ethnographic Studies | |Journal=Ethnographic Studies | ||
|Volume=14 | |Volume=14 | ||
| + | |Pages=24-48 | ||
| + | |URL=https://zenodo.org/record/823092#.Wd5_ZjBrzIV | ||
|DOI=doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.823092 | |DOI=doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.823092 | ||
|Abstract=This paper provides consideration of “mental maps” as an analytic device, and the im- | |Abstract=This paper provides consideration of “mental maps” as an analytic device, and the im- | ||
| Line 25: | Line 28: | ||
tional phenomena; that the appeal to mental maps adds unnecessary complexity to | tional phenomena; that the appeal to mental maps adds unnecessary complexity to | ||
analyses; and that mental maps work to distance the reader of analyses from the phe- | analyses; and that mental maps work to distance the reader of analyses from the phe- | ||
| − | nomena that they purportedly describe. | + | nomena that they purportedly describe. |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 14:32, 11 October 2017
| Carlin2017 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Carlin2017 |
| Author(s) | Andrew Carlin |
| Title | Navigating the walkways: Radical inquiries and mental maps |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Walking, Mental, Foundationalism, Public Space |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2017 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Ethnographic Studies |
| Volume | 14 |
| Number | |
| Pages | 24-48 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.823092 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper provides consideration of “mental maps” as an analytic device, and the im- portation of foundational theorising in new disciplinary environments. “Mental maps” – as representations, mental imagery, even a shared “mental topography” – is a popular and readily available device with which to conceptualise how we orient to our world (Gould & White 1974). The deployment of “mental maps” is frequent and extends be- yond psychology (Blaut et al. 2003; Lloyd 2000; Lobben 2004; Xirogiannis et al. 2004), as conceptualisations reliant upon mental representations and cognition theories en- croach upon other disciplines. This does not mean that the psychologistic reductions in- volved in the importation of mental maps as interdisciplinary work are diluted: the cog- nitivism of mental maps is preserved in new interdisciplinary settings. Mental maps, as “explanatory fctions” (Coulter 1979), provide cover for analysts searching for patterns that draw together a patchwork of “data” (e.g. Matei et al. 2001). What I suggest in this paper is that mental maps are themselves iterative of foundational- ist approaches; that mental maps are inappropriate means to describe social organisa- tional phenomena; that the appeal to mental maps adds unnecessary complexity to analyses; and that mental maps work to distance the reader of analyses from the phe- nomena that they purportedly describe.
Notes
