Constructivist Foundations
Journal Impact IF - Analysis · Trend · Prediction · Ranking


Journal Impact IF



-51.9 %

Journal Impact IF Trend

Related Journals

Popular Journals

Constructivist Foundations

The 2019-2020 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 1.035, which is just updated in 2020.

Constructivist Foundations Impact Factor
Highest IF
Highest Journal Impact IF

The highest Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 2.154.

Lowest IF
Lowest Journal Impact IF

The lowest Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 0.204.

Total Growth Rate
IF Total Growth Rate

The total growth rate of Constructivist Foundations IF is 91.0%.

Annual Growth Rate
IF Annual Growth Rate

The annual growth rate of Constructivist Foundations IF is 10.1%.

Journal Impact IF Ranking

Subcategory Quartile Rank Percentile
Multidisciplinary Q1 28/111

Multidisciplinary 75%

Artificial Intelligence Q3 144/202

Artificial Intelligence 28%

Education Q2 498/1254

Education 60%

Journal Impact IF Ranking

· In the Multidisciplinary research field, the Quartile of Constructivist Foundations is Q1. Constructivist Foundations has been ranked #28 over 111 related journals in the Multidisciplinary research category. The ranking percentile of Constructivist Foundations is around 75% in the field of Multidisciplinary.
· In the Artificial Intelligence research field, the Quartile of Constructivist Foundations is Q3. Constructivist Foundations has been ranked #144 over 202 related journals in the Artificial Intelligence research category. The ranking percentile of Constructivist Foundations is around 28% in the field of Artificial Intelligence.
· In the Education research field, the Quartile of Constructivist Foundations is Q2. Constructivist Foundations has been ranked #498 over 1254 related journals in the Education research category. The ranking percentile of Constructivist Foundations is around 60% in the field of Education.

Constructivist Foundations Impact Factor 2020-2021 Prediction

Constructivist Foundations Impact Factor Predition System

Constructivist Foundations Impact Factor Prediction System is now online. You can start share your valuable insights with the community.

Predict Check All Preditions
Total Publications
Total Citations

Annual Publication Volume

Annual Citation Record

International Collaboration Trend

Cited Documents Trend

Journal Impact IF History

Year Journal Impact IF
Year Journal Impact IF
2019-2020 1.035
2018-2019 2.154
2017-2018 1.609
2016-2017 1.116
2015-2016 1.385
2014-2015 0.722
2013-2014 0.204
2012-2013 0.526
2011-2012 0.542
Journal Impact IF History

· The 2019-2020 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 1.035
· The 2018-2019 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 2.154
· The 2017-2018 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 1.609
· The 2016-2017 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 1.116
· The 2015-2016 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 1.385
· The 2014-2015 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 0.722
· The 2013-2014 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 0.204
· The 2012-2013 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 0.526
· The 2011-2012 Journal Impact IF of Constructivist Foundations is 0.542

Publications Cites Dataset

Year Publications Citations
Year Publications Citations
2006 13 5
2007 42 36
2008 63 47
2009 18 80
2010 33 91
2011 61 107
2012 44 106
2013 69 172
2014 124 213
2015 133 294
2016 158 249
2017 115 225
2018 90 141
2019 90 230
2020 91 167
2021 0 28
Publications Cites Dataset

· The Constructivist Foundations has published 13 reports and received 5 citations in 2006.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 42 reports and received 36 citations in 2007.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 63 reports and received 47 citations in 2008.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 18 reports and received 80 citations in 2009.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 33 reports and received 91 citations in 2010.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 61 reports and received 107 citations in 2011.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 44 reports and received 106 citations in 2012.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 69 reports and received 172 citations in 2013.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 124 reports and received 213 citations in 2014.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 133 reports and received 294 citations in 2015.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 158 reports and received 249 citations in 2016.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 115 reports and received 225 citations in 2017.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 90 reports and received 141 citations in 2018.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 90 reports and received 230 citations in 2019.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 91 reports and received 167 citations in 2020.
· The Constructivist Foundations has published 0 reports and received 28 citations in 2021.
· The total publications of Constructivist Foundations is 1152.
· The total citations of Constructivist Foundations is 2191.

What is Impact Factor?

The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a scientometric index calculated by Clarivate that reflects the yearly average number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher impact factor values are often deemed to be more important, or carry more intrinsic prestige in their respective fields, than those with lower values.

Constructivist Foundations | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

Impact factor is commonly used to evaluate the relative importance of a journal within its field and to measure the frequency with which the “average article” in a journal has been cited in a particular time period. Journal which publishes more review articles will get highest IFs. Journals with higher IFs believed to be more important than those with lower ones. According to Eugene Garfield “impact simply reflects the ability of the journals and editors to attract the best paper available.” Journal which publishes more review articles will get maximum IFs. The Impact Factor of an academic journal is a scientometric Metric that reflects the yearly average number of citations that recent articles published in a given journal received. It is frequently used as a Metric for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher Impact Factor are often deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. The Constructivist Foundations Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2020) by papers published in the Constructivist Foundations during the two preceding years (2018-2019). Note that 2020 Impact Factor are reported in 2021; they cannot be calculated until all of the 2020 publications have been processed by the indexing agency. New journals, which are indexed from their first published issue, will receive an impact factor after two years of indexing; in this case, the citations to the year prior to Volume 1, and the number of articles published in the year prior to Volume 1, are known zero values. Journals that are indexed starting with a volume other than the first volume will not get an impact factor until they have been indexed for three years. Occasionally, Journal Citation Reports assigns an impact factor to new journals with less than two years of indexing, based on partial citation data. The calculation always uses two complete and known years of item counts, but for new titles one of the known counts is zero. Annuals and other irregular publications sometimes publish no items in a particular year, affecting the count. The impact factor relates to a specific time period; it is possible to calculate it for any desired period. In addition to the 2-year Impact Factor, the 3-year Impact Factor, 4-year Impact Factor, 5-year Impact Factor, Real-Time Impact Factor can provide further insights and factors into the impact of Constructivist Foundations.


The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Impact factors are calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). ISI was acquired by Thomson Scientific & Healthcare in 1992, and became known as Thomson ISI. In 2018, Thomson ISI was sold to Onex Corporation and Baring Private Equity Asia. They founded a new corporation, Clarivate, which is now the publisher of the JCR.


The impact factor is used to compare different journals within a certain field. The Web of Science indexes more than 11,500 science and social science journals. Journal impact factors are often used to evaluate the merit of individual articles and individual researchers. This use of impact factors was summarised by Hoeffel:

Impact Factor is not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles but there is nothing better and it has the advantage of already being in existence and is, therefore, a good technique for scientific evaluation. Experience has shown that in each specialty the best journals are those in which it is most difficult to have an article accepted, and these are the journals that have a high impact factor. Most of these journals existed long before the impact factor was devised. The use of impact factor as a measure of quality is widespread because it fits well with the opinion we have in each field of the best journals in our specialty....In conclusion, prestigious journals publish papers of high level. Therefore, their impact factor is high, and not the contrary.

Eugene Garfield

In brief, Impact factors may be used by:
  • Authors to decide where to submit an article for publication.
  • Libraries to make collection development decisions
  • Academic departments to assess academic productivity
  • Academic departments to make decisions on promotion and tenure.
As impact factors are a journal-level metric, rather than an article- or individual-level metric, this use is controversial. Garfield agrees with Hoeffel,but warns about the "misuse in evaluating individuals" because there is "a wide variation [of citations] from article to article within a single journal". Other things to consider about Impact Factors:
  • Many journals do not have an impact factor.
  • The impact factor cannot assess the quality of individual articles. Even if citations were evenly distributed among articles, the impact factor would only measure the interests of other researchers in an article, not its importance and usefulness.
  • Only research articles, technical notes and reviews are “citable” items. Editorials, letters, news items and meeting abstracts are “non-citable items”.
  • Only a small percentage of articles are highly cited and they are found in a small subset of journals. This small proportion accounts for a large percentage of citations.
  • Controversial papers, such as those based on fraudulent data, may be highly cited, distorting the impact factor of a journal.
  • Citation bias may exist. For example, English language resources may be favoured. Authors may cite their own work.
Moreover, informed and careful use of these impact data is essential, and should be based on a thorough understanding of the methodology used to generate impact factors. There are controversial aspects of using impact factors:
  • It is not clear whether the number of times a paper is cited measures its actual quality.
  • Some databases that calculate impact factors fail to incorporate publications including textbooks, handbooks and reference books.
  • Certain disciplines have low numbers of journals and usage. Therefore, one should only compare journals or researchers within the same discipline.
  • Review articles normally are cited more often and therefore can skew results.
  • Self-citing may also skew results.
  • Some resources used to calculate impact factors have inadequate international coverage.
  • Editorial policies can artificially inflate an impact factor.
Impact factors have often been used in advancement and tenure decision-making. Many recognize that this is a coarse tool for such important decisions, and that a multitude of factors should be taken into account in these deliberations. When considering the use of the impact factor (IF), keep these aspects in mind:
  • IF analysis is limited to citations from the journals indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge. Currently, the Web of Science indexes only 8621 journals across the full breadth of the sciences, and just 3121 in the social sciences.
  • A high IF/citation rate says nothing about the quality -- or even, validity -- of the references being cited. Notorious or even retracted articles often attract a lot of attention, hence a high number of citations. The notority related to the first publication on "cold fusion" is one such example.
  • Journals that publish more "review articles" are often found near the top of the rankings. While not known for publishing new, creative findings, these individual articles tend to be heavily cited.
  • The IF measures the average number of citations to articles in the journal -- given this, a small number of highly-cited articles will skew the figure.
  • It takes several years for new journals to be added to the list of titles indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge, so these newer titles will be under-represented.
  • It's alleged that journal editors have learned to "game" the system, encouraging authors to cite their works previously published in the same journal.
Comparing Journals Across Disciplines? Not a good idea! Using Impact Factors within a given discipline should only be done with great care, as described above. Using impact factor data to compare journals across disciplines is even more problematic. Here are some of the reasons:
  • Disciplines where older literature is still referenced, such as Chemistry and Mathematics, offer challenges to the methodolgy since older citations (older than two years) are not used to calculate the impact factor for a given journal. (Five-year impact factor analysis, which can be calculated using the Journal Citation Index database, helps smooth out this problem only to some degree.)
  • Different disciplines have different practices regarding tendency to cite larger numbers of references. Higher overall citation rates will bump upward impact factor measurements.
  • Where it's common for large numbers of authors to collaborate on a single paper, such as in Physics, the tendency of authors to cite themselves (and in this case, more authors) will result in increased citation rates.

Pros and Cons of the Impact Factor


  • A vetted, established metric for measuring journal impact within a discipline.
  • Designed to eliminate bias based on journal size and frequency.
  • Individual articles makes an uneven contribution to overall Impact Factor.
  • Impact Factor does not account for certain things, things like context (postive or negative citaion) and intentionality (self-citation).
  • The metric is proprietary to and bound by the contents of the Thomson Reuters database.
  • Citations, on which the Impact Factor is based, count for less than 1% of an article's overall use.


Numerous critiques have been made regarding the use of impact factors. A 2007 study noted that the most fundamental flaw is that impact factors present the mean of data that are not normally distributed, and suggested that it would be more appropriate to present the median of these data. There is also a more general debate on the validity of the impact factor as a measure of journal importance and the effect of policies that editors may adopt to boost their impact factor (perhaps to the detriment of readers and writers). Other criticism focuses on the effect of the impact factor on behavior of scholars, editors and other stakeholders. Others have made more general criticisms, arguing that emphasis on impact factor results from negative influence of neoliberal policies on academia claiming that what is needed is not just replacement of the impact factor with more sophisticated metrics for science publications but also discussion on the social value of research assessment and the growing precariousness of scientific careers in higher education.
Experts stress that there are limitations in using impact factors to evaluate a scholar's work. There are many reasons cited for not relying on impact factor alone to evaluate the output of a particular individual. Among these are the following:

  • A single factor is not sufficient for evaluating an author's work.
  • Journal values are meaningless unless compared within the same discipline. Impact factors vary among disciplines.
  • The impact factor was originally devised to show the impact of a specific journal, not a specific scholar. The quality and impact of the author's work may extend beyond the impact of a particular journal.
According to Jim Testa, a researcher for ThomsonReuters Scientific, the most widespread misuse of the Impact Factor is to evaluate the work of an individual author (instead of a journal). "To say that because a researcher is publishing in a certain journal, he or she is more influential or deserves more credit is not necessarily true. There are many other variables to consider." (interview 6/26/2008 in Thomson Reuters blog entry)

Constructivist Foundations
Journal Profile


Constructivist approaches support the idea that mental structures such as cognition and perception are actively built by one’s mind rather than passively acquired. However, constructivist approaches vary in function of how much influence they attribute to constructions.Many assume a dualistic relationship between reality and constructed elements. They maintain that constructed mental structures gradually adapt to the structures of the real world (e.g., Piaget). In this view perception is the pickup of information controlled by the mental structure that is constructed from earlier perceptions (e.g., Neisser). This leads to the claim that mental structures are about learning sensorimotor contingencies (e.g., O’Regan).Others seek to avoid the dualistic position. Either they skeptically reject that the structures of the real world can be compared with mental ones, independently of the senses through which the mental structures were constructed in the first place (e.g., von Glasersfeld), or they embrace a phenomenological perspective that considers perception as the grouping of experiential complexes (e.g., Mach).All these approaches emphasize the primacy of the cognitive system (e.g., Llinás) and its organizational closure (e.g., von Foerster, Maturana). Hence, perceived patterns and regularities may be regarded as invariants of inborn cognitive operators (e.g., Diettrich).Constructivist approaches can be said to differ also with respect to whether constructs are considered to populate the rational-linguistic (e.g., von Glasersfeld, Schmidt) or the biological-bodily (“enactivist/embodied” theories, e.g., Varela). Constructivist Foundations is an international triannual peer-reviewed academic journal that focuses on constructivist approaches to science and philosophy, including radical constructivism, enactive cognitive science, second order cybernetics, biology of cognition and the theory of autopoietic systems, and non-dualizing philosophy. It was established in 2005 and the editor-in-chief is Alexander Riegler (Free University of Brussels).

Highly Cited Keywords


The ISSN of Constructivist Foundations is 1782-348X . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

ISSN (Online)
ISSN (Online)

The ISSN (Online) of Constructivist Foundations is - . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Constructivist Foundations is published by Vrije Universiteit Brussel .

Publication Frequency
Three times a year
Publication Frequency

Constructivist Foundations publishes reports Three times a year .


The Publication History of Constructivist Foundations covers 2010-2019 .

Open Access
Open Access

Constructivist Foundations is Subscription-based (non-OA) Journal. Publishers own the rights to the articles in their journals. Anyone who wants to read the articles should pay by individual or institution to access the articles. Anyone who wants to use the articles in any way must obtain permission from the publishers.

Publication Fee
Publication Fee

There is no publication fee for submiting manuscript to Constructivist Foundations. Constructivist Foundations is Subscription-based (non-OA) Journal. Publishers own the rights to the articles in their journals. Anyone who wants to read the articles should pay by individual or institution to access the articles.


The language of Constructivist Foundations is English .


The publisher of Constructivist Foundations is Vrije Universiteit Brussel , which locates in Belgium .

Selected Articles

Full Title Authors
Full Title Authors
Is the Reduction of Abstraction in the Syllabus an Appropriate Aim of Decolonisation C. Fields · C. Fields
Forms of Constructivism and Forms for Constructivism Bruce Edmonds · Bruce Edmonds
Non-Dualism and Self-Reference in Constructivism C. Fields · C. Fields
Pristine Experience, the Feeling of Veracity, Iteration, and the Bracketing of Presuppositions E. Balsemão Pires · E. Balsemão Pires
The EMG Properties Limit Ultimate Classification Accuracy in Machine Learning for Prosthesis Control R. T. Hurlburt · R. T. Hurlburt
New Concepts or Just Re-Wording? Humberto R. Maturana · Humberto R. Maturana
Authors Response: If First-Person Knowledge is Excavated, What Kind of Research Follows? F. S. Perotto · F. S. Perotto
Diving Deeply into Radical Constructivism Urban Kordeš · E. Demšar · E. Demšar
Authors Response: Granularity and Irritation, and the Irritations They Aroused Marco Bettoni · Marco Bettoni
Boundaries between and Variety within Approaches Hugh Gash · Hugh Gash
Constructivism in Pains of Self-Analysis: A Differential Construction of a Dialogue? Armin Scholl · Armin Scholl
Concerns with the Validity and Practicality of First-Person Data: Where Do We Go from Here? M. Lenartowicz · M. Lenartowicz
Towards a Dialogue Among Constructivist Research Programs A. McAuliffe · A. McAuliffe
Plasticity Within and Across Multiple Levels Hugo Cadenas · Hugo Cadenas
The Folly of a Normative Account ofConstructivist Agents P. De Loor · P. De Loor
Selfhood Regained: From the Minimalist to the Multidimensional Self - and Back Again R. J. Martin · R. J. Martin
Three Other Challenges for Artificial Constructivist Agent from an Enactive Perspective Olivier L. Georgeon · Mathieu Guillermin · Mathieu Guillermin
Mastering the Laws of Feedback Contingencies Is Essential to Constructivist Artificial Agents W. Craelius · W. Craelius
A Radical Constructivist Approach to the Human-Machine Interface John Stewart · John Stewart
Lived Experience: Past and Present M. Guicciardi · M. Guicciardi
A Sociocultural Perspective for Learning Loops J. Proulx · J.-F. Maheux · J.-F. Maheux
Applying Radical Constructivism to Machine Learning: A Pilot Study in Assistive Robotics P. Vermersch · P. Vermersch
Access Conditions to Past Experience Markus Nowak · Claudio Castellini · C. Massironi · C. Massironi
Authors Response: Radical Constructivism in Machine Learning: We Want More! Peter Cariani · Peter Cariani
Choosing the Right Observables Urban Kordeš · E. Demšar · E. Demšar
Excavating Belief About Past Experience: Experiential Dynamics of the Reflective Act Raf Vanderstraeten · Raf Vanderstraeten
Some Remarks on the Social Construction of Constructivism G. Becerra · J. A. Castorina · J. A. Castorina
Authors Response: Toward a Pluralistic and Dialogic Constructivism A. M. Collings · A. M. Collings
First-Person Science is Third Person and Vice Versa T. Prosen · S. Vörös · S. Vörös
Constructivisms and Ivo Kohlers Goggles M. Füllsack · M. Füllsack
Heterarchical Reflexive Conversational Teaching and Learning as a Vehicle for Ethical Engineering Curriculum Design Van Bendegem · Van Bendegem
Authors Response: The University and Their Trained Educators: Future Undecided R. J. Martin · R. J. Martin
Are We Professors If No One Is Learning? Changing University Education S. Kletzl · S. Kletzl
Concepts, Intuitions, and Hypotheses C. M. Herr · C. M. Herr
Curricula, Knowledge and Design in the Context of Radical Constructivist Education K. Werner · K. Werner
Is Speaking of Mind or Matter a Matter of Choice R. Prentner · R. Prentner
Epistemology, Metaphysics and the Preconditions of Science Z. Simpson · Z. Simpson
Social Justice, Teacher Change and the Need for Case-Based Evidence B. Pierce · B. Pierce
How to Promote Constructivist Teaching P. Baron · P. Baron
Misunderstood Circular Causation:Who Implements Autonomy?andWhat Stabilises the Daisies? N. Palfreyman · N. Palfreyman
Authors Response: Toward a Reciprocally Causal-Selective Architecture J. W. Roberts · J. W. Roberts
What Is New in Non-Dualism? Advancement and Criticism between 2013 and 2018 I. Harvey · I. Harvey
Further Support for the Stabilization Thesis: Circular Causality, Ecosystems Growth & Development, and Allostasis Stefan Weber · Stefan Weber
A Psychology of the In Between D. Vernon · D. Vernon
How Inherently Non-Autonomous Are Robots? E. Baggs · E. Baggs
The Nonmodern Ontological Theatre N. Palfreyman · J. Miller-Young · J. Miller-Young
Authors Response: Informing Metaphysical Choices with Epistemic Considerations R. Lowe · R. Lowe
Radical Constructivism and the Decolonisation of Epistemology Hugo Cadenas · Hugo Cadenas
A Few Pending Challenges from the Perspective of a Theory of Organisms Ben Sweeting · Ben Sweeting
Conflating Abstraction with Empirical Observation: The False Mind-Matter Dichotomy M. Montévil · M. Montévil
What Is a Cognizing Subject? Construction, Autonomy and Original Causation F. Cummins · F. Cummins
Enaction Demands an Ontological Light Touch with Respect to theSubject P. Baron · P. Baron
From Constructivist Monologues to Dialogues and Polylogues Bernardo Kastrup · Bernardo Kastrup
Self-Referential and Enactive Nature of First- and Third-Person Sciences of the Mind T. Hug · T. Hug
Are Our Limbs Agents that Need to Estimate Our Intentions T. Strle · T. Strle
Plasticity, Granularity and Multiple Contingency - Essentials for Conceiving an Artificial Constructivist Agent M. F. Fultot · M. F. Fultot
On Plasticity and Granularity in Artificial Life Models M. Füllsack · M. Füllsack
From Problem Solving to Problem Posing, and from Strategies to Laying Down a Path in Solving: Taking Varelas Ideas to Mathematics Education Research Markus Nowak · Claudio Castellini · Carlo Massironi · Carlo Massironi
Progress in First-Person Method: A Few Steps Forward, a Few Steps Back J.-M. Roy · J.-M. Roy
The Mathematics of Autonomy Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
In the Eigenform of the Beholder Hugh Gash · Hugh Gash
Authors Response: Multiple Views in Search of Unifying Models D. G. Gozli · D. G. Gozli
The Resonant Biology of Emotion Allan Køster · Allan Køster
Embodiment, Knowledge-Generation and Disciplinary Identity Poletti Stefano · Poletti Stefano
The Transcendental Character of Temporality and the Buddhist Contribution to Time-Consciousness J. Kiverstein · J. Kiverstein
Life is Intrinsically Temporal Laurinda C. Brown · Laurinda C. Brown
What Is the Exact Directional Causality Between Affect, Action and Time-Consciousness? Alexander Kravchenko · Alexander Kravchenko
Performance as an Epistemological Tool Describing the Envelope of Perception L. Hengwei · D. Da · D. Da
Making Use of Contact, Niches, and Coordination A. Hjorth · A. Hjorth
The Myth of the Cognitive Niche J. M. Durán · J. M. Durán
A Newcomer to the Neurophenomenological Family C. Baquedano · C. Fabar · C. Fabar
Modeling Subjects Experience While Modeling the Experimental Design: A Mild-Neurophenomenology-Inspired Approach in the Piloting Phase G. de Zeeuw · G. de Zeeuw
Enaction Without Hagiography S. E. Kastberg · S. E. Kastberg
Musical Emotions Emerge from the Interaction of Factors in the Music, the Person, and the Context L. Hengwei · D. Da · D. Da
A Note on Introducing Formal Ontology to Constructivists N. Zaslawski · N. Zaslawski
A New Scientific Phenomenology? Questions about the Evolution of a Phenomenological Endeavor P. De Jesus · P. De Jesus
Refining the Model for Emotion Research: A 4E Perspective Laurence D. Richards · Laurence D. Richards
Audience and Eigenform: Cybersemiotic Epistemology and theTruth of the Human Spiritin Performance F. Cummins · F. Cummins
Three Questions on the Relation between Theatre Studies and Cybernetics K. Werner · K. Werner
Taking Seven-League Steps? K. Werner · K. Werner
Authors Response: Enactivism, Phenomenology, and Ontology: A Difficult Partnership E. Landgraf · E. Landgraf
De-Essentializing Human Nature: Truths of the Posthuman Spirit S. Vörös · S. Vörös
From Umwelten to Lebenswelten: A Casual Stroll with Uexküll, Plessner, and Merleau-Ponty Christy · Christy
On Mutual Enrichment between First- and Third-Person Sciences and Phenomenological Methodology J. Richards · J. Richards
Francisco Varelas Four Key Points of Enaction Applied to Working on Mathematical Problems E. Thompson · E. Thompson
Loud Crisis, Quiet Crisis: Varelas Proposal Resonates in Contemporary Psychological Science Adrian G. Palacios · Maria-Jose Escobar · E. Céspedes · E. Céspedes
Teaching Activity in the Context of Mathematical Activity I. R. Cohen · I. R. Cohen
Self and Non-Sense: The Radicality of Varelas Contribution to Immunology J.-M. Roy · J.-M. Roy
Maths and Neurophenomenology Andrea Pace Giannotta · Andrea Pace Giannotta
Varela on the Pragmatic Dimension of Phenomenology Nelson M. Vaz · L. A. Botelho Andrade · L. A. Botelho Andrade
The Epigenetic Immune Network V. Sevim · V. Sevim
Co-evolution of Problem Posing and Problem‑Solving after Finding a Way In S. Vörös · Alexander Riegler · Alexander Riegler
A Plea for not Watering Down the Unseemly: Reconsidering Francisco Varelas Contribution to Science K. M. Martiny · K. M. Martiny
Authors Response: Degrees of Openness, Embodiment, Circularity, and Invariance Frédéric Alexandre · Frédéric Alexandre
How to Understand Brain-Body-Environment Interactions? Toward a Systemic Representationalism D. G. Gozli · D. G. Gozli
The Lackluster Role of Misperceptions in an Enactivist Paradigm John Stewart · John Stewart
Time As theAcid Testof Neurophenomenology N. Banting · E. Simmt · E. Simmt
The Past, Present and Future of Time-Consciousness: From Husserl to Varela and Beyond Nelson M. Vaz · L. A. Botelho Andrade · L. A. Botelho Andrade
From (Observing) Problem Solving to (Observing) Problem Posing: Fronting the Teacher as Observer Urban Kordeš · Urban Kordeš
The elusive blueprint for building bridges Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
Mathematical Work of Francisco Varela P. Lazanas · P. Lazanas
Authors Response: Not Hagiography but Ideational Biography: In Defense of Existential Enaction G. Becerra · J. A. Castorina · J. A. Castorina
Diseases: Loss of Inner Harmonies? L. M. Nascimento · E. Myin · E. Myin
No Strength from Weakness R. F. Weir · R. F. Weir
Moving Toward a Paradigm Shift by Developing that Paradigm Shift E. Tuci · E. Tuci
Laws of Form and Paraconsistent Logic H. Gash · H. Gash
Authors Response: Not Objective, Not Subjective - Something Else: Coordination of Actions Hugh Gash · Hugh Gash
Authors Response: Is a Weak Notion of Representation not Compatible with a Contextualist and Enactivist Account of Perception? Shaun Gallagher · Shaun Gallagher
Francisco Varela and Immune System Modeling, Closure, Cognition and Enaction W. J. Clancey · W. J. Clancey
Enacting Enaction: A Dialectic Between Knowing and Being Susanne Ravn · Susanne Ravn
The Reflective Science of Ethnography and Its Role in Pragmatic Design Dan Lloyd · Dan Lloyd
Protention and Predictive Processing: The Wave of the Future J. Mpodozis · J. Mpodozis
Function vs. Structure: The Immune System as a Case in Point S. Gallagher · S. Gallagher
Authors Response: Internatural Relations Toma Strle · Toma Strle
On Embodying Decision-Making and the Endless Circularity of Understanding the Mind Adrian G. Palacios · Maria-Jose Escobar · Esteban Céspedes · Esteban Céspedes
Missing Colors: The Enactivist Approach to Perception K. Zahidi · K. Zahidi
Not All Problems Are Equal: Is Varelas Concept of a Problem Transferable to Mathematics Education Research? John Stewart · John Stewart
Saying What Cannot Be Said Sebastjan Vörös · Michel Bitbol · Michel Bitbol
On the Second-Person Method: Considering the Diversity and Modes of Subjectss Descriptions N. Zaslawski · N. Zaslawski
Eigenforms, Interfaces and Holographic Encoding: Toward an Evolutionary Account of Objects and Spacetime D. W. Scott · D. W. Scott
Dialectical DanceandDialectical Star: What Exactly Are We Talking About? Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
Authors Response: Self-Reference and the Self V. V. Cifarelli · V. V. Cifarelli
Dynamic Connections between Problem Posing and Problem‑Solving: On the Usefulness of Multiple Perspectives Klaus Krippendorff · Klaus Krippendorff
Monologic versus Dialogic Distinctions of Selves S. Høffding · S. Høffding
The Perils ofOpen Science: How Radical and How Many? E. Demšar · E. Demšar
Enacting Science: Extending Enaction Beyond the Content of a Theory Valérie Bonnardel · Valérie Bonnardel
Back to Representationalism Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen · Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen
Diachrony in Human Cognition and Problem Solving M. McGann · M. McGann
Authors Response: The Sign and Its World C. Baquedano · C. Fabar · C. Fabar
Coordination Produces Cognitive Niches, not just Experiences: A Semi-Formal Constructivist Ontology Based on von Foerster F. Zahnoun · E. Myin · E. Myin
Unforeseen Influences on the Classification of Categories Reflecting the Structure of Experience Chris Fields · Donald D. Hoffman · Chetan Prakash · Robert Prentner · Robert Prentner
Radical Neurophenomenology: We Cannot Solve the Problems Using the Same Kind of Thinking We Used When We Created Them K. Pavlov-Pinus · K. Pavlov-Pinus
Thinking in eigenbehaviors as a transdisciplinary approach Peter Cariani · Peter Cariani
Fueling the Take-off Stage of Scientific Reflexivity Manfred Füllsack · Alexander Riegler · Alexander Riegler
Authors Response: Eigenform, Action, the Continuous and the Discrete Karl H. Müller · Karl H. Müller
Supersizing Third-Person, Downsizing First-Person Approaches? Armin Scholl · Armin Scholl
What Is It Like to Be Conscious? Towards Solving the Hard Problem Bruce Edmonds · Bruce Edmonds
Authors Response: Situating Generative First-Person Analysis within Neuro-, Micro-, Cardio- and Transcendental Phenomenology Natalie Depraz at al L. Ciechanowski · L. Ciechanowski
Plurality of Consciousness Appearances - Plurality of Methods Natalie Depraz · M. Gyemant · T. Desmidt · T. Desmidt
Building a Science of Experience: Neurophenomenology and Related Disciplines Aviva Berkovich-Ohana · Aviva Berkovich-Ohana
Multiple Tensions in Musics Semiotic Eigenbehavior T. J. McFarlane · T. J. McFarlane
A First-Person Analysis Using Third-Person Data as a Generative Method: A Case Study of Surprise in Depression Camila Valenzuela-Moguillansky · Alejandra Vásquez-Rosati · Alexander Riegler · Alexander Riegler
Authors Response: Beyond the Boundaries of Third-Person Methods in Emotion Research: The Accuracy of the Micro-Phenomenological Interview Natalie Depraz · M. Gyemant · T. Desmidt · T. Desmidt
Varela as the Uncanny A. Vásquez-Rosati · A. Vásquez-Rosati
Body Awareness to Recognize Feelings: The Exploration of a Musical Emotional Experience Y. Ataria · Y. Ataria
Enaction as a Lived Experience: Towards a Radical Neurophenomenology A. Vásquez-Rosati · A. Vásquez-Rosati
Enacting Enaction: Conceptual Nest or Existential Mutation? C. Petitmengin · C. Petitmengin
Where is Spacetime Constituted B. Pierce · B. Pierce
Towards a Neuropsychological Semiotics of Music K. Coessens · K. Coessens
Has the Philosophers Stone of the Interaction Between First- and Third-Person Data Finally been Found? Leslie P. Steffe · Leslie P. Steffe
The Truth of the Human Spiritand Interaction Mechanisms X. A. González-Grandón · X. A. González-Grandón
Do Nonclassical Worlds Entail Dualism S. Delarivière · S. Delarivière
Eigenform and Expertise R. Espejo · R. Espejo
Constructivist Foundations of Musical Sense-Making: Eigenbehavior and the Role of Circularity G. de Zeeuw · G. de Zeeuw
Eigenform Encoding and Spacetime M. Reybrouck · M. Reybrouck
Modelling Subjectivity and Uncertainty inReal WorldSettings Urban Kordeš · Urban Kordeš
Eigenform, Symmetry, and the First Distinction Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
Authors Response: Distinguishing Domains in/through an Oscillating Naturalist Theatre of Logical Types Van Bendegem · Van Bendegem
The Tricky Transition from Discrete to Continuous Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
Eigenform and Reflexivity K. Werner · K. Werner
Certain Questions Regarding Perception and Boundaries Eric Dietrich · Eric Dietrich
Explaining Top-Down Minds from the Bottom Up. Review of From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds by Daniel C. Dennett, 2017 A. Marcianò · A. Marcianò
Eigenforms, Interfaces and Holographic Encoding: Their Relation to the Information Loss Paradox for Black Holes and Quantum Gravity D. W. Scott · D. W. Scott
Music as Semiotic Eigenbehavior A. Ciaunica · A. Ciaunica
Inviting Embodied Imagination to the Semiotic Eigenbehavior Musical Party T. Scholte · T. Scholte
Enactive Consciousness and Gendlins Dream Analysis R. D. Ellis · R. D. Ellis
Across the Uncanny Valley: The Ecological, the Enactive, and the Strangely Familiar Di Paolo · Di Paolo
Dreams: An Experimental Laboratory of Phenomenology Urban Kordeš · Urban Kordeš
Phenomenology as Critique, Discovery, and Justification davood G. Gozli · davood G. Gozli
Presentation of the World: Gibson and Husserl on the Interplay between the Objective and the Subjective K. Werner · K. Werner
Intersubjectivity in the Study of Experience H. De Jaegher · H. De Jaegher
The Epistemological Dance: Difference, Experience and Representation Hugh Gash · Hugh Gash
Enaction, and Its Relation to Science in an Objective Key Fred Cummins · Fred Cummins
Neurophenomenologys Epistemological Locus and the Need to Consider Its Primitive Sources: Internal Processing and Development A. Rosales-Lagarde · A. Rosales-Lagarde
Interactivity Should Aim to Extend, Not Reject, the Conceptual Foundations of Enaction Tom Froese · Tom Froese
Sensorimotor Direct Realism: How We Enact Our World Michael Beaton · Michael Beaton
Authors Response: Explanatory Pluralism and Precise Conceptual Development Matthew Isaac Harvey · Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen · Sune Vork Steffensen · Sune Vork Steffensen
Going Beyond Theory: Constructivism and Empirical Phenomenology Urban Kordeš · Urban Kordeš
Understanding Design from a Second-Order Cybernetics Perspective: Is There a Place for Material Agency? David Griffiths · David Griffiths
To What Extent Can Second-Order Cybernetics Be a Foundation for Psychology? M. Arnold-Cathalifaud · D. Thumala-Dockendorff · D. Thumala-Dockendorff
Connecting Second-Order Cybernetics Revolution with Genetic Epistemology Gastón Becerra · Gastón Becerra
Theorizing Agents: Their Games, Hermeneutical Tools and Epistemic Resources K. Pavlov-Pinus · K. Pavlov-Pinus
Mapping the Varieties of Second-Order Cybernetics Karl H. Müller · Alexander Riegler · Alexander Riegler
Consciousness as Self-Description in Differences Diana Gasparyan · Diana Gasparyan
Remarks From a Continental Philosophy Point of View Tatjana Schönwälder-Kuntze · Tatjana Schönwälder-Kuntze
Who isWe? Some Observations on Sensorimotor Direct Realism John Pickering · John Pickering
Authors Response: Persevering with the Non-Trivial Urban Kordeš · Urban Kordeš
Phenomenological Teleology and Human Interactivity Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen · Matthew Isaac Harvey · Matthew Isaac Harvey
In-sight Quotient (InQ): Developing a Strategy to Empower Students to Ensure Their Own Quality of Learning Bernard Scott · Bernard Scott
Learning Conversations for Cybernetic Enlightenment S. Vörös · Michel Bitbol · Michel Bitbol
Radical Enactivism and Ecological Psychology: Friends or Foes? Karim Zahidi · Jan Van Eemeren · Jan Van Eemeren
Can the Lived Experience of Living Beings Be Approached through Inference S. Taguchi · S. Taguchi
The Gap Or Not The Gap: Is That The Neurophenomenological Question? X. A. González-Grandón · X. A. González-Grandón
Authors Response: Complementarity of Symmetry and Asymmetry Martin Fultot · Lin Nie · C. Carello · C. Carello
Blurring the Differences between the Dream, Perceptual and Hallucinatory Experiences Is Not the Answer Juan C. gonzález · Juan C. gonzález
Not-Quite-So Radical Enactivism Dan Lloyd · Dan Lloyd
Perception-Action Mutuality Does Not Obviate Emergence or the Animals Active Role in the Perceptual Act Dobromir Dotov · Dobromir Dotov
Crossing the Explanatory Gap by Legwork, not by Fiat Michael Beaton · Michael Beaton
Not to Avoid But Legitimize: Why the Gap Could Be Natural For the Enactive World Gasparyan Diana · Gasparyan Diana
Dreaming: Ontological and Methodological Considerations Michael D. Kirchhoff · Michael D. Kirchhoff
Missing Out On the Radicalism of Neurophenomenology K. Miyahara · K. Miyahara
Realities in the Plural John Stewart · John Stewart
The Ontology of Perception: Agency, Evolution and Representationalism M. de Pinedo · M. de Pinedo
Learning of New Percept-Action Mappings Is a Constructive Process of Goal-Directed Self-Modification Peter Cariani · Peter Cariani
In Search of a Remedy olga Markic · olga Markic
Authors Response: Mind Never The Gap, Redux Michael D. Kirchhoff · Daniel D. Hutto · Daniel D. Hutto
In search of a new looking glass: cognitive science is not dead, it is just asleep Etienne B. Roesch · Etienne B. Roesch
The Role of External Objects in Perceptual Experience B. Pierce · B. Pierce
On the Too Often Overlooked Radicality of Neurophenomenology Michel Bitbol · Elena Antonova · Elena Antonova
We Need to Go Deeper! Conceptual and Methodological Considerations on the Depth of Dream Experience Jennifer Michelle Windt · Jennifer Michelle Windt
Representationalism and the Sensorimotor Theory David Silverman · David Silverman
The Role of Allostasis in Sense-Making: A Better Fit for Interactivity than Cybernetic-Enactivism? R. Lowe · R. Lowe
Identity or Dynamic Structure S. Gallagher · S. Gallagher
Return to Sender? Or Why Messages Never Reach Their Destination B. Kastrup · B. Kastrup
Lived Experience and Cognitive Science Reappraising Enactivisms Jonasian Turn Mario Villalobos · Dave Ward · Dave Ward
Interactivity and Enaction in Human Cognition Matthew Isaac Harvey · Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen · Sune Vork Steffensen · Sune Vork Steffensen
What Kind of Epistemic Activity is Expert Introspection Martin Fultot · Martin Fultot
On the Necessity of Foundations, Intersubjectivity and Cognitive Science Toma Strle · Toma Strle
How Can Meaning be Grounded within a Closed Self-Referential System? bryony Pierce · bryony Pierce
Is Intentionality Banned from Sciences of the Living Being J.-L. Petit · J.-L. Petit
Embracing the Environment: Ecological Answers for Enactive Problems M. Heras-Escribano · M. Heras-Escribano
Enactivism and Ecological Psychology: Divided by Common Ground M. McGann · M. McGann
Living (in) Different Enactivist Worlds: A Mathematics Education Researchers Point of View on Enactivism J. Proulx · J. Proulx
Modern Anthropomorphism and Phenomenological Method P. Gaitsch · P. Gaitsch
Exploring the Depth of Dream Experience: The Enactive Framework and Methods for Neurophenomenological Research E. Solomonova · X. W. Sha · X. W. Sha
What Can Cybernetics Learn from Design Christiane M. Herr · Christiane M. Herr
A Theatre for Exploring the Cybernetic Stuart A. Umpleby · Stuart A. Umpleby
Cybernetic Foundations for Psychology Bernard Scott · Bernard Scott
Circularities, Organizations, and Constraints in Biology and Systems Theory T. Marks-Tarlow · T. Marks-Tarlow
Facilitating Constructivist Principles in Using Apps: Moving from Class Video to Community J. Proulx · J. Proulx
The University Lecture Room and the School Classroom: Does the Stage Affect the Acting? D. Chansky · D. Chansky
Constraints on the Use of a Conversational Strategy to Restructure the Classroom P. Borg · P. Borg
Many Forms of Circularity D. Griffiths · D. Griffiths
Toward a Model of Constructivist Mathematics Teaching John Stewart · John Stewart
A Model of Causation Is Not Causation S. Vörös · S. Vörös
The Micro-Macro-Problem in Constructivism Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
Negotiating the Classroom T. Scholte · T. Scholte
A Response to Responsibilities Toma Strle · Toma Strle
Personalized Education: Whats the Holdup? J. Lochhead · J. Lochhead
Authors Response: Changes in Institutionalised Education: Is It Time to Rebel and Yell? Laurence D. Richards · Laurence D. Richards
What Came First, the Chicken or the Egg? The Model of Circularity as a Model of Mutual Referentiality P. Baron · P. Baron
Neither Time nor Causality Is of the Essence Diana Gasparyan · Diana Gasparyan
Investigating Teaching from a Constructivist Stance: A Model of Communication Leonardo Bich · Leonardo Bich
The Non-Relationality of Consciousness A. Schetz · A. Schetz
Authors Response: Recursivity, Anticipation, Mutual Referentiality, and the End of Human Analytics? E. S. Tillema · E. S. Tillema
Negotiating Between Learner and Mathematics: A Conceptual Framework to Analyze Teacher Sensitivity Toward Constructivism in a Mathematics Classroom M. Füllsack · M. Füllsack
When Is a Constructivist not a Constructivist Philip Borg · David P.L. Hewitt · Ian Jones · Ian Jones
Circularity and the Micro-Macro-Difference T. McCloughlin · T. McCloughlin
A Cybernetic Approach to Contextual Teaching and Learning M. Füllsack · M. Füllsack
Constructivism as a Key Towards Further Understanding of Communication, Culture and Society P. Baron · P. Baron
Authors Response: Cognitive Autonomy and Communication R. Palmaru · R. Palmaru
From Circular Reasoning to Micro-Macro Reasoning in the Classroom? R. Palmaru · R. Palmaru
Circular Constitution of Observation in the Absence of Ontological Data A. Hjorth · A. Hjorth
Russellian Monism: The Heritage of Russells Construction of Matter from Experience – Review of Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism Olivier L. Georgeon · Boltuc Piotr · Boltuc Piotr
Constitution: Epistemological and Ontological V. Havelange · V. Havelange
Observation and Objectivity: Two Conflicting Notions at the Basis of the Circularity Argument D. Schyff · D. Schyff
To Expect the Unexpected J. Cespedes-Guevara · J. Cespedes-Guevara
Mathematical Observers Observing Mathematics A. Berkovich-Ohana · A. Berkovich-Ohana
Beware False Dichotomies S. Vörös · S. Vörös
Constructivism and the Epistemological Trap of Language K. Peil Kauffman · K. Peil Kauffman
Second Thoughts on Cybernetic Unifications Peter Cariani · Peter Cariani
Where Is Consciousness Urban Kordeš · Urban Kordeš
Wielding the Cybernetic Scythe in the Blunting Undergrowth of Psychological Confusion V. Kenny · V. Kenny
Eigenforms, Coherence, and the Imaginal A. M. Collings · A. M. Collings
Finally Understanding Eigenforms Michael R. lissack · Michael R. lissack
Cybernetics, Reflexivity and Second-Order Science Louis H. Kauffman · Louis H. Kauffman
Obstacles to Cybernetics becoming a Conceptual Framework and Metanarrative in the Psychologies Philip Baron · Philip Baron
The Social and the Psychological: Conceptual Cybernetic Unification vs Disciplinary Analysis? Eva Buchinger · Eva Buchinger
(Architectural) Design Research in the Age of Neuroscience: The Value of the Second-Order Cybernetic Practice Perspective Andrea Jelic · Andrea Jelic
Second-Order Cybernetics Needs a Unifying Methodology thomas R. Flanagan · thomas R. Flanagan
Truthfulacting emerges through forward model development Bernd Porr · Bernd Porr
Digital Design Research and Second-Order Cybernetics M. de Sousa van Stralen · M. de Sousa van Stralen
Black BoxTheatre: Second-Order Cybernetics and Naturalism in Rehearsal and Performance T. Scholte · T. Scholte
On the Too Often Overlooked Complexity of the Tension between Subject and Object Y. Ataria · Y. Ataria
Cybernetics and Synergetics as Foundations for Complex Approach Towards Complexities of Life L. Šugman Bohinc · L. Šugman Bohinc
Does Second-Order Cybernetics Provide a Framework for Theatre Studies? A. Müller · A. Müller
Second-Order Cybernetics as a Fundamental Revolution in Science Bruce Clarke · Dorothy Chansky · Dorothy Chansky
Audience and Autopoiesis Kathleen Forsythe · Kathleen Forsythe
Conserving the Disposition for Wonder Robert J. Martin · Robert J. Martin
The Importance - and the Difficulty - of Moving Beyond Linear Causality Michael R. lissack · Michael R. lissack
Shed the Name to find Second-Order Success: Renaming Second-Order Cybernetics to Rescue its Essence J. Pickering · J. Pickering
Self-Description Alone Will not Account for Qualia T. Scholte · T. Scholte
Design Cycles: Conversing with Lawrence Halprin T. Scholte · T. Scholte
Authors Response:Playing With Dynamics: Procedures and Possibilities for a Theatre of Cybernetics Levin Sergei Mikhailovich · Levin Sergei Mikhailovich
Consciousness as Self-Description and the Inescapability of Reduction Diana Gasparyan · Diana Gasparyan
Authors Response: Phenomenology of the System: Intentionality, Differences, Understanding, and the Unity of Consciousness T. G. Gill · T. G. Gill
Viva the Fundamental Revolution! Confessions of a Case Writer J. dos Santos Cabral Filho · J. dos Santos Cabral Filho
Cybernetics Is the Answer, but What Was the Conversation About? T. Stingl de Vasconcelos Guedes · T. Stingl de Vasconcelos Guedes
Perception-Action Mutuality Obviates Mental Construction Martin Fultot · Lin Nie · Claudia Carello · Claudia Carello