Beyond the Meaning Given. The Meaning as Explanandum

  • Sergio SalvatoreEmail author
Regular Article


The paper starts from the recognition of Bruner’s contribution to the development of psychological science. It is claimed here that to proceed in that direction requires the building of an analytical notion of meaning. This analytical notion should distinguish between meaning-making and sensemaking, namely between the processes of elaboration and use of meaning (meaning-making) and the processes that makes the meaning emerge to be lived as psychological reality (sense-making). In order to discuss this distinction, two main issues are addressed – the limit of the hypostatized view of meaning and the dynamics of presentification through which meaning is endowed with value of life. These two issues are complementary – together they push psychology to search for a theoretical and methodological framework where meaning can be investigated as an emergent psychological phenomenon, and not only taken for granted as a premise.


Sense-making Meaning making 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The Author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the author.


  1. Albertazzi, L., Jacquette, D., & Poli, R. (2001). Meinong in his and our times. In L. Albertazzi, D. Jacquette, & R. Poli (Eds.), The school of Alexius Meinong (pp. 3–48). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  2. Bickhard, M. (2009). Interactivism: A manifesto. New Ideas in Psychology, 27, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brentano, F. (1995). In L. L. McAlister (Ed.), Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint. London, Routledge: (Original work published 1874).Google Scholar
  4. Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bruner, J. S. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carretero, M., & Kriger, M. (2011). Historical representations and conflicts about indigenous people as national identities. Culture and Psychology., 17(2), 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chaudhary, N., & Pilli, P. (2019). Beyond the information given: A commentary. Integrative Psychological and Behiavioral Science, 53, in press.Google Scholar
  9. de Saussure, F. (1977) Course in General Linguistics (W. Baskin, Trans.). Glasgow: Fontana/Collins (Original work published in 1916).Google Scholar
  10. Eco, U. (1975). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eco, U. (2009). On the ontology of fictional characters: A semiotic approach. Sign Systes Studies, 37(1/2), 82–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Feldman-Barrett, L. (2006). Solving the emotion paradox: Categorization and the experience of emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 20–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fini, V., & Salvatore, S. (in press). The fuel and the engine. A general semio-cultural psychological framework for social intervention. In S. Schliewe, N. Chaudhary, & P. Marsico (Eds.), Cultural Psychology of Intervention in the Globalized World. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Graneist, A., & Habermas, T. (2019). Beyond the text given: Studying the scaffolding of narrative emotion regulation as a contribution to Bruner and Feldman’s cultural cognitive developmental psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behiavioral Science, 53.
  16. Grazzani, I., & Brockmeier, J. (2019). Language games and social cognition: Revisiting Bruner. Integrative Psychological and Behiavioral Science, 53, in press.Google Scholar
  17. Heft, H. (2013). Environment, cognition, and culture: Reconsidering the cognitive map. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33, 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Iannaccone, I., Perret-Clermont, N., & Convertini, J. (2019). Children as investigators of Brunerian “Possible worlds”. The role of narrative scenarios in children’s argumentative thinking. Integrative Psychological and Behiavioral Science, 53, in press.Google Scholar
  19. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kanizsa, G. (1955). Margini quasi-percettivi in campi con stimolazione omogenea [Quasi-perceptual contours in homogeneously stimulated fields]. Rivista di Psicologia, 49(1), 7–30.Google Scholar
  21. Moscovici, S. (1961/1976). La psychanalyse son image et son public. Etude sur la répresentation sociale de la psychanalyse. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France [English edition by G. Duveen (2008), Psychoanalysis. Its Image and Its Public. Cambridge: Polity Press].Google Scholar
  22. Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freeman & Co..Google Scholar
  23. Peirce, C. S. (1932). On Sign. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Volume II). Cambridge: Harvard University Press [Original version: 1987].Google Scholar
  24. Salvatore, S. (2012). Social life of the sign: Sensemaking in society. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 241–254). Oxford: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  25. Salvatore, S. (2016a). Psychology in black and white. The project of a theory-driven science. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  26. Salvatore, S. (2016b). The cultural psychology of desire. In J. Valsiner et al. (Eds.), Psychology as the science of human being. Annales of theoretical psychology (pp. 33–49). Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Salvatore, S. (2017). The formalization of cultural psychology. Reasons and functions. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 51(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Salvatore, S. (2018). Culture as dynamics of sense-making. A semiotic and embodied framework for socio-cultural psychology. In Cambridge handbook of culture & psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge Press University.Google Scholar
  29. Salvatore, S., & Venuleo, C. (2013). Field dependency and contingency in the modelling of sensemaking. Papers on Social Representation [On Line Journal], 22(2), 21.1–21.41.Google Scholar
  30. Sanford, A. J. (1987). The mind of man. Models of human understanding. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  31. Schank, R., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  32. Smorti, A., & Fioretti, C. (2019). Beyond the anomaly: where Piaget and Bruner meet. Integrative Psychological and Behiavioral Science, 53.
  33. Toomela, A. (2007). Culture of science: Strange history of the methodological thinking in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(1), 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Valsiner, J. (2009). Between fiction and reality: Transforming the semiotic object. Sign Systes Studies, 37(1/2), 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Valsiner, J. (2014). An invitation to cultural psychology. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Verheggen, T., & Baerveldt, C. B. (2007). “We Don't share!” exploring the theoretical ground for social and cultural psychology: The social representation approach versus an enactivism framework. Culture & Psychology, 13(1), 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell (Original work published in 1953).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of SalentoLecceItaly

Personalised recommendations