19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
DOI: 10.20472/TEC.2018.005.001
JONATHAN APPEL
Tiffin University, United States
DOHEE KIM-APPEL
Associate Professor, United States
TOWARDS A TRANSDISCIPLINARY VIEW: INNOVATIONS IN
HIGHER EDUCATION
Abstract:
A Transdisciplinary view (or “Transdisciplinarity”) is defined as practice and research efforts
conducted by academics from different disciplines working jointly to create new conceptual,
theoretical, methodological, and transnational innovations that integrate and move beyond
discipline-specific approaches to address complex problems. Often the traditional structure of
education is the fragmenting knowledge into narrow and isolated academic disciplines. Learning is
seen as a product, not a process. This more traditional view sees academics as an accumulation of
objective facts, rather seeing the world as a dynamic whole composed of a myriad of interrelated
phenomena. The authors call for a more connected Transdisciplinary paradigm for education,
research and practice. Examples of such emergence areas of study are given and discussed.
Keywords:
Transdisciplinary, Transdisciplinarity, Multidisciplinary, Higher Education
JEL Classification: I21, I23
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 1
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
Introduction
A Transdisciplinary view (or “Transdisciplinarity”) is defined as practice and research
efforts conducted by academics from different disciplines working jointly to create new
conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and transnational innovations that integrate and
move beyond discipline-specific approaches to address complex problems. This article
(and presentation) will highlight the authors own areas of study (behavioral health,
expressive arts) to highlight how this approach can be used in research, professional
practice, and in teaching.
Transdisciplinarity
Although scholar have discussed “Trans-discipline,” “Transdisciplinary,” or
“Transdisciplinarity,” remains "rather elusive concepts" that continues to evolve (Jahn et
al., 2012). Transdisciplinarity was introduced to the world in 1972 at a Paris seminar held
by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Conceived as
a concept in the early seventies (Apostel et al. 1972; Jantsch 1972; Kocklemans; 1979;
McGregor, 2011), it has only just recently gained momentum and grudging acceptance
as a necessary paradigmatic, methodological and intellectual innovation.
Transdisciplinarity is a relatively new, emerging approach to knowledge creation,
competing with longstanding multi- and interdisciplinary focus (Du Plessis et al., 2013).
Two Versions of Transdisciplinarity
There are two dominant transdisciplinary camps (Augsburg 2014; Klein, 2004):
(1) The approach championed by physicist Basarab Nicolescu (and philosopher Edgar
Morin); they view transdisciplinarity as a new methodology to create new knowledge
(Nicolescuian transdisciplinarity)
(2) The other camp (frequently referred to as the Swiss, Zurich or German school)
emerged from an International Transdisciplinary Conference held in Zurich in 2000 The
Zurich camp conceptualizes transdisciplinarity as a new type of research, called Mode 2
research.
Nicolescuian Transdisciplinarity
This view suggests the presence of several levels of Reality and the space between
disciplines and beyond disciplines is full of information. Disciplinary research concerns, at
most, one and the same level of Reality; moreover, in most cases, it only concerns
fragments of one level of Reality (Nicolescu, 2002).
According to this view, transdisciplinary concerns the dynamics of several levels of
Reality at once. The discovery of these dynamics necessarily passes through disciplinary
knowledge. While not a new discipline or a new “super-discipline” transdisciplinary
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 2
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
research and practice are fed by disciplinary research; in turn, disciplinary research is
clarified by transdisciplinary knowledge in a new complementary way (Nicolescu, 2002)..
The Zurich School
In Mode 2 multidisciplinary teams are brought together for short periods of time to work
on specific problems in the real world for knowledge production and problem resolution.
This 'mode' can be explained by the way research funds are distributed among scientists
and how scientists focus on obtaining these funds.
In contrast, Mode 1 is knowledge production which is motivated by scientific knowledge
alone (fundamental research) and which is not bothered by the applicability of its findings.
It is also founded on a conceptualization of science as separated into discrete disciplines
(e.g., a biologist does not bother about chemistry).
Transdisciplinary Research
Transdisciplinary Research can be defined as research efforts conducted by investigators
from different disciplines working jointly to create new conceptual, theoretical,
methodological, and transnational innovations that integrate and move beyond discipline-
specific approaches to address a common problem(s).
Different from “Multidisciplinary” or “interdisciplinary”
Interdisciplinary, like Multi-disciplinarily, concerns the transfer of knowledge and/or
methods from one discipline to another, allowing research to spill over disciplinary
boundaries, but staying within the framework of each discipline.
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 3
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
Figure 1: Differences in disciplinarities: intra, cross, multi, inter, trans
Interdisciplinary: working within a single discipline (closed system).
Cross disciplinary: viewing one discipline from the perspective of another.
Multidisciplinary: people from different disciplines working together, each drawing on their
disciplinary knowledge.
Interdisciplinary: integrating knowledge and methods from different disciplines, using a real
synthesis of approaches—but still disciplinary.
Transdisciplinary: creating a unity of intellectual frameworks beyond the disciplinary
perspectives. Creating new “transcendent” areas of knowledge and practice (dynamic—open
system).
Source: Nicolescu, B. (2002).
“Wide Lens View”
Whether it is education, research, assessment, intervention, or policy --we need to make
sure we are doing "holistic" multi-method data collection that takes both the "objective
(empirical-behavioral-external) view--as well as the "subjective" (internal-qualitative
narrative) views in account. To overemphasize empirical reductionism is see the world
with a myopic focus. Reductionism or reducing things to their constituent parts can teach
us important things, but we also need to study how they function as a whole, and do
justice to their emergent properties. Biological reductionism, the idea that all of
psychological experience can be explained, in principle, by the interplay of neurons and
chemicals, is like someone who, discovering the lever mechanisms in a typewriter,
declares "now we know how books are written.” When we focus on these phenomena
separately, we get piecemeal "solutions" that fail to capture the underlying dynamics of
the larger system.
Transdisciplinarity requires adequate addressing of the complexity of problems and the
diversity of perceptions of them, that abstract and case-specific knowledge are linked,
and that practices promote the common good (Du Plessis et al., 2013).
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 4
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
MAP Model (Appel, Kim-Appel, 2010)
The authors have developed a theoretical model for a deeper understanding and
description of human development and identity. This model is called the Multipath
Approach to Personality (MAP). The assumptions of the Multipath Approach to
Personality (MAP) model is extended to include the notion that the total spectrum of
functioning (self) as well as personality is shaped by the combined forces of evolutionary,
biological, situational, mental, as well as psycho-spiritual processes--all embedded in a
temporal, sociocultural, and developmental context (see Figure 1).
Figure 2: Intersectionality of Personality and Development
The Multipath Approach to Personality (MAP) consists of following dimensions or levels
of analysis: Socio-cultural
(1) The Neuropersonal; (2) the Intrapersonal; (3) the Interpersonal; (4) the Exopersonal;
(5) the Ecopersonal; and (6) the Transpersonal.
The Neuropersonal
A ground level of analysis can be thought of as the ―“Neuropersonal“ level. Through this
viewfinder human beings are viewed as biological and evolutionary organisms. This level
or dimension of the self is focused on biological, genetic, and physiological functioning
and also represents the ―pre-personal‖ personality field. From this perspective the
individual can be primary described as driven by biological and evolutionary mechanisms.
The Intrapersonal
The Intrapersonal level is the psychological and the intrapsychic domain. This is the
realm of territory staked out by cognitive science and ego psychology and its intellectual
descendents. From childhood into adulthood as the neo-cortex and frontal lobes expand
the neural networks, a more differentiated self-reflective consciousness develops.
It is at this level we then began to give way to an increasing sense of separation from the
whole, with an accompanying growing sense of individual self-consciousness and self-
identity beginning to develop.
Source: Appel & Kim-Appel (2010).
The Interpersonal
The Interpersonal is the family and social relationship field. Healthy Relationships are
important for human development and functioning, with personal and family relationships
providing many intangible healthy benefits, and feedback and identity to the self-system.
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 5
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
When relationships are dysfunctional, individuals may be more prone to disordered
behavior and/or mental disturbances.
The Exopersonal
The Exopersonal represents the cultural and societal aspect of the self system. This level
acknowledges that human personality development arises from particular socio-cultural
contexts. This level suggests that some sociocultural stressors reside within the social
system – not within the person (but are expressed at other levels, including the
interpersonal and intrapersonal level). This level of analysis recognizes assumptions
people make vary widely across cultures–depending especially on whether the culture
emphasizes individualism or collectivism.
The Ecopersonal
The Ecopersonal is the self –system that is part of the global-planetary field, which is
―post-personal‖. This level represents an ecological consciousness. It is how we see
ourselves, our egos, in relationship to the planet and the natural world as a whole.
The Transpersonal
The Transpersonal field represents the collective unconscious and the emerging
collective and unity consciousness, as well as acknowledgement of the nearly universal
need for the spiritual dimension of the human psyche. This domain extends the ―post-
personal ―and emerges into the ―transrational stages of consciousness. Reason is not
excluded in this level, but is integrated with other methods of inquiry and ways of
knowing. At this level one is driven towards wholeness, subject/objective unification, and
the field of fundamental consciousness.
The MAP Model assumes one can use various levels of analysis in the description of a
phenomenon (psychological/behavioral functioning in our research), and no one level
would be the complete or accurate description. But taken together all levels provide an
additive view that constructs a wider perspective.
To use the metaphor of a microscope—one can only focus on one level of magnification
at a time, with other levels falling out of focus. Yet beyond observation, all levels remain
in synchronized existence. This model supposes that each discipline or sub-discipline in
the sciences or behavioral sciences does not have a monopoly on the “truth”—but can
serve as a commentary whole.
Other Transdisciplinary Applications
Systems Theory
Systems Theory Biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1950) proposed that the biological
concept of a system was a useful framework for studying the phenomena of all sciences.
It was at this time the concept of general systems theory was born. General systems
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 6
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
theory or systems theory is a conceptual framework that moves beyond the reductionistic
and mechanistic tradition in science that has focus on linear cause and effect
relationships. Systems theory frames explanations in terms of wholeness, self-
organization, relationships, and interactions between parts. Pattern recognition and
events in the environmental context are key notions (Hanson, 1995).
General systems theory has also been utilized by numerous professional disciples in
varying forms within the latter half of this century. An example of this can be seen in the
development of the biopsychosocial model in medicine. This model attempts to provide a
comprehensive systems-oriented basis for integrating factors in health and illness that
range from the molecular-biological to the sociocultural domain (Engels, 1980). Recent
developments in this model have even expanded the levels to include the
transpersonal/spiritual domain (Sulmasy, 2002). The acceptance of the biopsychosocial
model has been slow to displace the contrasting biotechnical model of medicine and
psychiatry. This model views illness in a linear fashion-- as a mechanistic breakdown of
the body “machine.” Writers have pointed out that the psychological and emotional
functioning can be viewed as a system with roots in biology and embryology, wherein the
fertilized egg repeatedly divides into cells that perform different tasks as a means to
achieve balance of function, but can be greatly impacted by environmental systems
(Papero, 1990).
Systems theory has also been utilized by experts and researchers in the fields of the
behavioral sciences (Appel & Kim-Appel, 2010). Systems theory frames explanations in
the general principles of wholeness, organization, relationships, reciprocity, and mutual
causation. The focus is on the identification of interacting variables and pattern
recognition. In this view, identity, personality organization, and mental health symptoms
emerge out of a jointly active and dynamic process. Models with these views describe
holistic epistemologies which attempt to reflect this complex ontology and thereby avoid
reductionism.
Sustainability Science
'Sustainability science' is problem-driven, multi-disciplinary scholarship that seeks to
facilitate the design, implementation, and evaluation of effective interventions that foster
shared prosperity and reduced poverty while protecting the environment (Harvard, 2018).
'Sustainability science' employs multiple disciplines of the natural, social, medical and
engineering sciences and focuses on examining the interactions between human,
environmental, and engineered systems to understand and contribute to solutions for
complex challenges that threaten the future of humanity and the integrity of the life
support systems of the planet (Komiyama & Takeuchi, 2006)—topics include climate
change, biodiversity loss, pollution and land and water degradation as well as social and
economic variables (see figure 2).
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 7
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
Figure 3: Intersectionality of Sustainability Science
Source: De Vries, B. J. (2012). Sustainability science. Cambridge University Press.
Therapeutic Jurisprudence
There is a newer proposition for an interdisciplinary approach to social deviance and
violence, which has emerged out of the approach called “Therapeutic Jurisprudence” (TJ)
(Wexler, 1996). This model suggests collaboration between the human service/mental
health systems and the criminal justice systems provides opportunities. TJ contends that
legal processes can influence upon the well-being of those participating in them. The
scope of TJ is broad. It studies the impact of legal processes on all participants including
judges, magistrates, lawyers, victims, witnesses, jurors, defendants, and justice or human
service system professionals (Wexler, 2015)
However, TJ presumes that access to mental health and other human services can
provide the legal system with opportunities to develop more appropriate resolutions to
family problems, therefore reducing recidivism (Wexler & Winick, 1996).
Neuro-Law
‘Neuro-law’ (e.g. Eagleman, 2008; Eastman and Campbell, 2006; Moriarty, 2008; Wolf,
2008; Yang and Raine, 2008)—examines what neuroscience data reveal about the mind,
brain and behavior asks what relevance this understanding may have to forensic
questions regarding violent individuals and the effective criminal justice and legal
response.
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 8
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
Behavioral Economics
Behavioral economics — a relatively new field that combines insights from psychology,
judgment, and decision making, and economics to generate a more accurate
understanding of human behavior. Among the pioneers of the behaviorist approach in
economics were Daniel Kanheman (also a Noble Laureate 2002) and Amos Tversky
(Tversky & Kahneman, 1992), who established the framework of the so-called "Prospect
Theory", where "loss aversion" was among the most important factors that cause such
deviations from rationality.
Cognitive Computing
Cognitive computing (CC) is the field that combines knowledge of computer systems with
knowledge of the human brain (Kelly, 2015). CC also includes the scientific disciplines of
artificial intelligence, signal processing, and cognitive sciences (Wang, Zhang, & Kinsner,
2010). This field’s goal is to teach computers to think like a human mind, rather than
developing an artificial system. Cognitive computing integrates technology and biology in
an attempt to develop more effective systems of intelligence. With major advances the
cognitive sciences, researchers interested in computer intelligence wanted to use deeper
biological understanding of how the brain worked to build computer systems modeled
after the mind, and most importantly to build computers that could integrate past
experiences into its system.
Convergence of Art, Science, Technology & Health
Transdisciplinarity can also be found in the arts and humanities. For example, the
Planetary Collegium seeks "the development of transdisciplinary discourse in the
convergence of art, science, and technology and consciousness research.” The
Plasticities Sciences Arts (PSA) research group also develops transdisciplinary
approaches regarding humanities and fundamental sciences relationships as well as the
Art & Science field. The Cleveland Clinic’s Arts & Medicine Institute is an example of a
combined health and art program, in which doctors-in-training receive art appreciation
education, and an art therapy approach is heavily used in patient recovery.
Collaborative Patient-centered Practice (CPCP)
Collaborative Patient-centered Practice (CPCP) is medical practice orientation that
represents health care professionals working together and with their patients/families. It is
based on the continuous interaction of two or more health professions or disciplines,
organized into a common effort, to solve or explore common issues with the best possible
participation of the patient. CPCP promotes the active participation of each discipline in
patient care (interdisciplinary—but also Trans-emergent). CPCP enhances patient and
family-centered goals and values, provides mechanisms for continuous communication
among caregivers, optimizes staff participation in clinical decision-making within and
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 9
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
across disciplines, and fosters respect for the disciplinary contributions of all
professionals (Herbert, 2005).
Interprofessional Education (IPE)
Education from a reductionist perspective also conflates information and learning, and
seems to think that technological skills can solve every problem. There is also a
conflation of training vs. learning. “Soft” topics like the humanities and history are seen as
superfluous to the education system. “Interprofessiona”l education occurs when students
from two or more professions learn about, from, and with each other to enable effective
collaboration and improve health outcomes. Once students understand how to work
interprofessionally, they are ready to enter the workplace as a member of the
collaborative practice team. This is a key step in moving health systems from
fragmentation to a position of strength” (WHO, 2010).
Global Education
The future of universities, communities, education, and professional development rests in
diversity and internationalization. Audrey Osler, director of the Centre for Citizenship and
Human Rights Education at the University of Leeds, asserts that "education for living
together in an interdependent world is not an optional extra, but an essential foundation".
Education of the present and future needs to be based on a philosophical foundation
rooted on the principles of “Global citizenship education (GCE)” (Green, 2012). GCE is a
form of education that involves civic learning that requires students' participation and
active learning in projects that address global issues of a social, political, economic, or
environmental nature. The two main elements of GCE are 'global consciousness'; the
moral or ethical aspect of global issues, and 'global competencies', or skills meant to
enable learners to compete in the global job market.
The Present: Why Aren’t We There?
A question that often comes up when discussion the concepts of Transdisciplinary
practice and education---is why don’t we embrace this more? Like Transdisciplinary itself
the answer is multi-level. Often the traditional structure of education is the fragmenting
knowledge into narrow and isolated academic disciplines. Learning is seen as a product,
not a process. Often this more traditional view sees academics as an accumulation of
objective facts, rather seeing the world as a dynamic whole composed of a myriad of
interrelated phenomena. This view is also embedded in the self-serving, “guild mentality”.
Most professional associations are almost exclusively interested in solely advancing the
professions and the professionals they narrowly serve. This often gets translated to “my
field can beat up your field” with the stakes being perceived as competition for prestige or
economic gain. Inter-professional interactions or cooperation may occur, but status levels
are clearly defined (e.g. Psychiatrists are head of interdisciplinary mental health teams).
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 10
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
The Wide Future
Socialization to a profession is critical process for education into a field or discipline.
While professional identity is important, it may be a premature end to a developmental
process. Like the Buddhist idea that one “needs to be somebody before they are
nobody,” one needs to understand the knowledge and tools of a given professions,
before they can clearly understand its weaknesses and limitations. We argue that one
must develop a professional identity and then move on to transcend it within a “Trans-
professional” Identity. If one does not do this it becomes too easy to become stuck in
one’s professional “silo”. Research and practice can be a reflection of the (closed)
systems that hold them. A classic example in the behavioral health field is when the
major paradigm or practice is biological psychiatry, medication become the proverbial
hammer, seeing nothing but nails. A transdisciplinary approach, while not negating the
value of a biological viewpoint or intervention, it would recognize that other approaches
may also be of value or even more effective. The implications of such an approach would
also be more interdisciplinary cooperation and contact. A transdisciplinary approach
would also strongly suggest use and publications in international interdisciplinary journals
as well as interdisciplinary transnational conferences. True insights could be obtained
with cross-fertilization of ideas and with inter-professional (and global) education. This
would supplement (not supplant) more traditional systems of academic developmental.
Conclusion: Towards Transdisciplinary Research, Practice, and
Education
Transdisciplinary Research, Practice and Education could aid the development of the
evolutionary spirit of internal critical consciousness, where even divergent fields as
religion and science are seen as complementary. Respect, solidarity and cooperation
could be global standards for the entire human race development. This ‘wide lens”
multiple systems view—reflects an “emergence” paradigm. The whole is not just the sum
of the reductionists’ parts. Linear causality may not reflect the true reality of many
phenomena. “Emergentists” contend the appearance of genuinely novel phenomena
within various levels in the complexity and reciprocity of living processes and matter.
Institutions of Higher Education need to create transdisciplinary learning communities of
scholars and practitioners dedicated to creating a new forms of knowledge in humane
and sustainable comprehensive understandings through education and research. We
must respond to the challenges of our times by promoting a transdisciplinary framework
that respects the multiplicity of views and ways of knowing in our diverse global
community.
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 11
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
References
Apostel, L. (1972). Interdisciplinarity Problems of Teaching and Research in Universities.
Appel, J., & Kim-Appel, D. (2010). The multipath approach to personality (MAP): A meta perspective
Journal of Transpersonal Research, 2, 108-115.
Augsburg, T. (2014). Becoming transdisciplinary: The emergence of the transdisciplinary individual. World
Futures, 70(3-4), 233-247.
De Vries, B. J. (2012). Sustainability science. Cambridge University Press.
Du Plessis, H., Sehume, J., & Martin, L. (2014). Concept and Application of Transdisciplinarity in
Intellectual Discourse and Research. Real African Publishers.
Eagleman, D.M. (2008). Neuroscience and the law. Houston Lawyer, 16(6), 36–40.
Eastman, N. & Campbell, C. (2006). Neuroscience and legal determination of criminal responsibility. Nature
Reviews: Neuroscience, 7(4), 311–318.
Engel, G. (1980). The clinical application of the biopsychosocial model. American Journal of Psychiatry,
137 (5), 535-544.
Green, M. F. (2012). Global citizenship: What are we talking about and why does it matter?. International
Educator, 21(3),
Hanson, B. G. (1995). General Systems Theory: Beginning with Wholes. Bristol, PA, London: Taylor &
Francis.
Herbert, C. P. (2005). Changing the culture: Interprofessional education for collaborative patient-centred
practice in Canada.
Jahn, T., Bergmann, M., & Keil, F. (2012). Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and
marginalization. Ecological Economics, 79, 1-10.
Jantsch, E. (1972). Towards interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in education and
innovation. Interdisciplinarity: Problems of teaching and research in universities, 97-121.
Kelly III, Dr. John (2015). Computing, cognition and the future of knowing. IBM Research: Cognitive
Computing. IBM Corporation
Klein, J. T. (2004). Prospects for transdisciplinarity. Futures, 36(4), 515-526.
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 12
19 June 2018, 5th Teaching & Education Conference, Amsterdam ISBN 978-80-87927-65-6, IISES
Kochelmans, J. (1979). Why interdisciplinarity? Interdisciplinarity and higher education, edited by J.
Kocklemans. University Park.
Komiyama, H., Takeuchi, K. 2006. Sustainability science: building a new discipline. Sustainability Science
1:1–6.
McGregor, S. L. (2011). Transdisciplinary axiology: to be or not to be. Integral Leadership Review, 11(3).
Moriarty, J.D. (2008). Flickering admissibility: neuroimaging evidence in the U.S. courts. Journal of
Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 26, 29–49.
Nicolescu, B. (2002). Manifesto of transdisciplinarity [Trans. K-C. Voss]. New York, NY: SUNY.
Papero, D. V. (1990). Bowen family systems theory. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Sulmasy D.P. (2002).A biopsychosocial-spiritual model for the care of patients at the end of life.
Gerontologist, 3, 24-33.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of
uncertainty”, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5: 297–323.
Wang, Y., Zhang, D., & Kinsner, W. (Eds.). (2010). Advances in cognitive informatics and cognitive
computing (Vol. 323). Springer.
Wexler, D. (2015). Moving forward on mainstreaming therapeutic jurisprudence: An ongoing process to
facilitate the therapeutic design and application of the law. Therapeutic Jurisprudence: New Zealand
Perspectives.
Wexler, D. B., & Winick, B. J. (Eds.). (1996). Law in a therapeutic key: Developments in therapeutic
jurisprudence. Carolina Academic Press.
Wexler, D. B. (1996). Applying the law therapeutically. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 5(3), 179-186.
Wolf, S.M. (2008). Neurolaw: The big question. American Journal of Bioethics, 8, 21–36.
World Health Organization (WHO), (2010). Framework for action on interprofessional education &
collaborative practice.
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science, 111(2872), 23-29.
Yang, Y., & Raine, A. (2008). Brain abnormalities in antisocial individuals: Implications for the Law. Journal
of Behavioral Science and the Law, 26, 65–83.
https://www.iises.net/proceedings/5th-teaching-education-conference-amsterdm/front-page 13
