Engeström ( 1990) presented an insightful analysis of how the adoption of an information system transformed the entire system of activities at a hospital. Most notably, Bødker ( 1989) and Kuutti ( 1991) argued for adopting activity theory as a theoretical foundation for, respectively, human–computer interaction and information systems research. A number of researchers, especially in Scandinavia and the United States, pointed out that by framing human–technology interaction within a larger context of purposeful human activities, the theory makes it possible to reach a deeper understanding of technology and its meaning for people. In Russia, the very emergence of ergonomics and human factors as a separate discipline was markedly influenced by activity theory (Leontiev, Zinchenko, & Panov, 1964 Zinchenko & Munipov, 1979).Īn important development in the application of the theory in studies of human uses of technology took place in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when activity theory started to be employed internationally to address new challenges associated with computers and information systems. Numerous references to various types of technology, from the stone axe and potter’s wheel to the most advanced computing devices of the time, can be found in Alexey Leontiev’s (1959/1981, 1975/1978) exposition of the main concepts and principles of the approach.
The human relationship with technology has always been of special interest to activity theory, which is hardly surprising given the focus of the theory on mediation and tools.