Social Cognition: New Insights from Affordance and Simon Effects

The perspective of the present project can be inscribed in the so-called “Social Cognition” framework, that in the last years moved from a focus on the individual mind toward embodied and participatory aspects of social understanding. Among the topics relevant for social cognition, the aim of the thesis was to shed more light on motor resonance and joint action, by using two well-known effects of cognitive psychology: “Affordance” and “Simon”. In the first part of the project, the Affordance effect has been considered, starting from Gibson to some post-Gibsonian theorizations. Particular attention has received the notion of “Micro-affordance”. The theoretical and empirical overview allows to understand how it can be possible to use the affordance effect to investigate the issue of motor resonance. A first study employed a priming paradigm and explored both in adults and school-age children the influence of a micro-affordance that can be defined dangerousness, and how motor resonance develops. The second part of the thesis focused on the Simon effect, starting with the presentation of the “stimulus–response (S–R) compatibility effect” to introduce the “Simon effect”. Particular attention has been dedicated to recent studies on the “joint Simon effect”. The reviewed empirical findings have been discussed in a wider theoretical perspective on joint action. The second study was aimed at investigating whether shared representations, as indexed by the presence of the joint Simon effect, are modulated by minimal ingroup–outgroup distinctions and by experienced interdependence between participants. The third study explored to what extent prior experience could modulate performance in task sharing, combining two paradigms of cognitive psychology, the joint Simon and the joint transfer-of-learning. In a general discussion the results obtained in the three studies have been summarized, emphasizing their original contribution and their importance within the Social Cognition research.

When the Practice of Theorizing Meets the Theorizing of Practice. Social Knowledge Making in Organization Science Academia and Managerial Communities

The aim of the present work is to contribute to a better understanding of the relation between organization theory and management practice. It is organized as a collection of two papers, a theoretical and conceptual contribution and an ethnographic study. The first paper is concerned with systematizing different literatures inside and outside the field of organization studies that deal with the theory-practice relation. After identifying a series of positions to the theory-practice debate and unfolding some of their implicit assumptions and limitations, a new position called entwinement is developed in order to overcome status quo through reconciliation and integration. Accordingly, the paper proposes to reconceptualize theory and practice as a circular iterative process of action and cognition, science and common-sense enacted in the real world both by organization scholars and practitioners according to purposes at hand. The second paper is the ethnographic study of an encounter between two groups of expert academics and practitioners occasioned by a one-year executive business master in an international business school. The research articulates a process view of the knowledge exchange between management academics and practitioners in particular and between individuals belonging to different communities of practice, in general, and emphasizes its dynamic, relational and transformative mechanisms. Findings show that when they are given the chance to interact, academics and practitioners set up local provisional relations that enable them to act as change intermediaries vis-a-vis each other’s worlds, without tying themselves irremediably to each other and to the scenarios they conjointly projected during the master’s experience. Finally, the study shows that provisional relations were accompanied by a recursive shift in knowledge modes. While interacting, academics passed from theory to practical theorizing, practitioners passed from an involved practical mode to a reflexive and quasi-theoretical one, and then, as exchanges proceeded, the other way around.