{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022202486678507993, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003552397868561279, 'mean_word_length': 5.748502994011976, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Commentary: Activity Theory is a Dead End for Methodological Thinking in Cultural Psychology Too

Reworking cultural psychology's methodology is of utmost importance if the discipline is to progress. This paper explores discussion of micro- and macro-cultural formal and informal methodologies of cultural psychology by Carl Ratner. It is concluded that the activity-theoretical approach to research methodology, applied in the target article, is fundamentally limited and cannot suggest appropriate methodologies that would lead to progress in cultural psychology. Instead, it is suggested that future discussions on methodological thinking should take into account that: (1) methodology is part of a scientific theory, and therefore what is studied must be defined in order to find appropriate methods for studies; (2) qualitative methodology should become the focus of methodology in cultural psychology; (3) the history of psychology contains forgotten but theoretically very rich ideas; and (4) activity theory has fundamental problems which make it inappropriate for showing direction for the development of methodology.