TCCR BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
The following table brings together, for academic purposes only, the complete bibliography that supports both the original literary work and the Cognosystemic Theory of Human Psychosocial Relational Construction (TCCR) itself. Each record lists the author(s), year, and title; the latter includes a link to the primary online source (PDF), for direct consultation.
Usage notice: the documents are enabled exclusively for online reading; download and print options have been disabled to protect these works.
If you are a rights holder and believe that any material or link infringes upon your rights, please contact us here for its review and, if appropriate, immediate removal of the material.
HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY OF TCCR BIBLIOGRAPHICAL AUTHORS
Here you will find a commented chronology of the main authors who are part of the fundamental bibliography of the TCCR. This tour covers, in a historical key, contributions from phenomenology and symbolic interactionism to systemic-functional linguistics, systemic approaches, social psychology, and cognitive/constructive psychotherapies.
Inclusion criteria: (1) direct theoretical relevance for the TCCR (meaning, relationship, system, language, change), (2) documented influence, and (3) articulation between individual–relational–sociohistorical levels. It is ordered by year of birth; you can filter by category/era and, by clicking, see a summary (description, contribution, and relevance for the TCCR). It is a curated and perfectible resource: suggestions with verifiable references are welcome.
RECOMMENDED COMPLEMENTARY READINGS
Article: “Contributions to the epistemology of Social Work”
Author: Boris A. Lima (1975)
Boris A. Lima's book (1975) criticizes positivism and the dependence on imported frameworks, and places Social Work in a scientific stage where theory and practice form a dialectical unit aimed at transforming reality. It reconstructs the science-technique link, reincorporates dialectical philosophy, and denounces "reiterative praxis." It examines the integrated/basic/unique methods and proposes a "Model of Intervention in Reality" (six phases) that brings theory and action closer, with the principle of totality and the subject as an agent of change.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
This approach converges with the TCCR: Lima demands endogenous theoretical production and the welding of theory-practice; the TCCR offers a systemic-relational metatheory centered on narratives (Cognosystem), which articulates micro-meso-macro levels and guides an ecosystemic methodology to transform meanings and realities. Thus, it provides the unified framework that Lima calls for: knowledge that arises from praxis and returns to it to change the social structure.
Article: “Thinking Social Work: An introduction from constructionism”
Author: Natalio Kisnerman (1998)
In this work, Kisnerman proposes a constructionist turn to think about Social Work: he recognizes the instability of knowledge, calls for deconstructing certainties, and for settling into a fertile "not knowing" for new practices. He repositions the professional role—distinguishing it from function and status—and highlights mediation as an intersubjective negotiation oriented towards consensus. The intervention is assumed to be creative and situated, redefining functions according to context and transforming relationships into networks of intersubjectivities.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
This perspective dialogues with the TCCR, which conceives psychosocial reality as an intersubjective narrative construction and approaches it in an ecosystemic key (micro, meso, and macro). The TCCR operationalizes this emphasis through the concept of the Cognosystem and the hermeneutic management of narratives—deconstruction and reconstruction—to transform meanings and bonds. Thus, Kisnerman's mediation and creative role find in the TCCR a unified architecture to intervene and promote social justice.
Article: “An epistemology of Social Work?”
Author: Ulises Toledo (2004)
In this article, Toledo examines the possibility of a proper epistemology for Social Work and its transition from "social technology" to a scientific discipline. He demands systematization, research, and theoretical construction, along with epistemological vigilance, to legitimize knowledge and overcome the theory/practice dichotomy. He criticizes the pragmatism that confuses utility with truth and proposes a regional epistemology that consolidates the field's identity and academic horizon.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR responds to that program: it presents itself as a systemic-relational metatheory that explains the construction of reality through interconnected narratives and proposes an ontology, epistemology, and methodology of ecosystemic intervention. It articulates micro-meso-macro levels through the Cognosystem, guiding theoretical production and providing an operative guide to transform meanings and bonds with a horizon of social justice.
Article: “History of Latin American Social Work. State of the art”
Authors: Édgar Malagón and Gloria Leal (2006)
In this article, Malagón and Leal elaborate a state of the art on the history of Latin American Social Work. They detect gaps and inconsistencies—especially regarding the seventies and reconceptualization—and map 32 publications (12 books, 4 chapters, 13 articles, 4 videos, and 3 on the Internet). They conclude that the historiography of the field must be rethought: the literature devalues practice, reproduces assistance-based approaches, makes contributions prior to the seventies invisible, and, being partly written from other sciences, makes it difficult to read its disciplinary development.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
From this review, the main epistemological implication is the urgency for Social Work to produce its own epistemology, capable of critically historicizing its categories, overcoming heteronomous narratives, and establishing situated validity criteria. The TCCR offers that scaffolding by proposing a cognosystemic metatheory that defines the object, an ontology of the relationship, and criteria of knowledge from situated practice; it articulates micro-meso-macro levels and their narrative systems; and provides a methodology to generate, contrast, and accumulate endogenous disciplinary theoretical frameworks, avoiding dependence on imported paradigms and enabling a proper scientific identity for Latin American Social Work.
Article: “Scientific knowledge and action knowledges in Social Work: overvaluations, disavowals and revaluations. A reading from the countries of North America”
Author: Claudia Mosquera (2006)
This article maps, from North American literature, three trends regarding the place of knowledge in Social Work: (1) dependence on "basic" disciplines and positivism, which relegates the profession to being a consumer of theories and to solving problems defined by others; (2) adherence to the technical-rational model and empirical-deductive logic; and (3) a constructivist-reflexive turn that revalues action knowledges, local and situated. It closes with the challenge of breaking the intervention-research dichotomy and repositioning practice as a legitimate source of knowledge.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
This reflection converges with the TCCR as an endogenous epistemological proposal: a cognosystemic metatheory that conceives psychosocial reality as a relational and narrative construction, integrates micro-meso-macro levels, and articulates research and intervention. By recognizing interdependence, agency, and reflexivity, the TCCR operationalizes action knowledges through processes of narrative (de)construction, offering a unified framework to generate its own theory and accumulate disciplinary knowledge from practice.
Article: “Changes in the Form of Knowledge in Social Work: From the ‘Social’ to the ‘Informational’?”
Author: Nigel Parton (2008)
In this article, Parton shows a shift in Social Work knowledge from the relational-social towards an informational regime: ICTs and management systems prioritize measuring, classifying risk, and monitoring performance, strengthening managerialism, reducing discretion, and generating "data doubles" that bureaucratize the bond and make subjectivities invisible (with greater surveillance, especially in childhood). This promise of rationality coexists with information overload and decontextualization. As a response, the author proposes a double movement: "accelerating" critical thinking in short operational times and "slowing down" the interpretation of techno-social transformations to safeguard the ethical-relational core of Social Work.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
In this sense, looking at this reflection in light of what the TCCR proposes, it turns out that, ultimately, there is no opposition between narrative and data: rather, what is urgently required is a critical articulation between both. In this case, the TCCR is a possible real solution, both from a theoretical and methodological perspective—with the development of its concepts of narrative cognoscitivity, the Cognosystem, and cognosystemic memes—allowing for the auditing of categories/indicators and guiding bimodal practices (structured fields + dense narrative sections), with contextual anchoring and traceability of meaning, integrating evidence without sacrificing ethics, agency, and context.
Article: “New epistemic turns to overcome the positivist model of disciplinarity in the social sciences”
Author: Zugey Velásquez (2009)
In this article, Velásquez criticizes positivist rationality and the "unity of method," arguing that social reality is constituted intersubjectively and transdisciplinarily. From postmodern and complex thought, she emphasizes fluidity, disorder, and uncertainty, questioning linearity and causality. She proposes assuming complexity (dialogical, recursive, hologrammatic, non-linear), abandoning rigid disciplinarisms, and reconstructing knowledge to overcome classic dichotomies, guiding non-hierarchical networks of understanding and intervention.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
This inflection converges with the TCCR as an endogenous epistemology for Social Work: a cognosystemic, relational, and narrative metatheory that integrates micro-meso-macro levels and guides research-intervention without exogenous dependence. The TCCR enables its own reflexive and situated theoretical body, articulating narrative systems to transform meanings and bonds, and strengthening the disciplinary scientific identity that Velásquez demands by transcending positivist disciplinarity.
Article: “Epistemology contextualized: Social-Scientific knowledge in a postpositivist era”
Author: Isaac Reed (2010)
In this article, Reed proposes a contextualized epistemology for the social sciences in general, distinguishing the "context of research" (frameworks and practices of the researcher) and the "context of explanation" (actions and meanings of the actors). He criticizes positivism for attempting to reduce both contexts to observation and logic, reviews two post-positivist turns—grounded theory, which collapses the contexts from ethnographic immersion, and postmodern anthropology, which separates them radically—and offers a synthesis: theories are frameworks of meaning that allow for the interpretation of local meanings and the achievement of a non-naturalistic objectivity through rigorous hermeneutics.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, the author's distinction between the context of research and explanation can be mapped as two narrative strata of the Cognosystem: the professional meta-narrative (protocols, categories, hypotheses) and the situated narratives of actors/networks. The TCCR proposes a recursive coupling between both through abductive-deductive-inductive cycles and hermeneutic practices of (de)construction, seeking objectivity as interpretive coherence and relational effectiveness. This enables the production of its own—not subsidiary—knowledge where intervention functions as an epistemic laboratory and findings rewrite frameworks, strengthening disciplinary theoretical accumulation and situated public decisions.
Article: “Production in social research and the investigative attitude in Social Work”
Author: Estela Grassi (2011)
Grassi examines the production of knowledge in the social sciences and its imbrication with the professional intervention of Social Work. She argues that validity is situated and provisional, but requires theoretical-empirical verification and epistemological vigilance to avoid reifying categories and "naturalizing" problems. She distinguishes academic research, institutional studies, and the "investigative attitude" as a feature of the profession: problematizing objects, reading the institution that institutes the problem, converting practice and casuistry into a source of knowledge, and incorporating this attitude into curricular training.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, Grassi's "investigative attitude" is reconfigured as meta-narrative vigilance: the professional inspects how the institution institutes the problem, how actors narrate it, and how these plots couple within the Cognosystem. The intervention becomes a design of semantic circulation: detecting frictions between levels (micro-meso-macro), adjusting the devices of meaning (e.g., cognosystemic memes), and evaluating validity by inter-level coherence, relational functionality, and relational justice. Thus, practice not only applies knowledge: it produces it and integrates it into an accumulable endogenous repository of Social Work.
Article: “Shaping a science of Social Work”
Author: John Brekke (2012)
John S. Brekke's article proposes to delineate a science of Social Work through three pieces: domains of inquiry, core constructs, and defining characteristics. He criticizes the "piggyback approach," as adopting foreign knowledge has prevented the establishment of a scientific identity. He formulates domains for understanding and for promoting change, and three vertebral constructs: biopsychosocial, person-in-environment, and service systems. He defends a research aesthetic of complexity, synthesis, and pluralism, and sets goals: to advance frontiers, to ground applied theory, to lead service technologies, and to educate from a proper scientific identity.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
What Brekke demands as a scientific architecture finds concretion in the TCCR: an endogenous cognosystemic metatheory and epistemology that define the Cognosystem as an ecosystemic narrative network and situate relationality as a central ontology. This epistemology organizes micro–meso–macro levels and integrates an ecosystemic intervention methodology coherent with that ontology. Thus, instead of "piggybacking" on external frameworks, the TCCR offers its own framework to understand and transform hegemonic and emerging narratives, strengthening identity and the production of disciplinary knowledge and opening a robust path of contemporary scientific development.
Article: “Social Work and the disciplinary fields of the social sciences in Chile”
Author: Fernando Farías (2012)
In this article, Farías examines what counts as a "discipline" in the Chilean social sciences. He distinguishes two meta-meanings—epistemic (foundations, object, method) and sociohistorical (institutions, power, recognition)—to read state and university taxonomies. He shows the heterogeneity of classifications, the confusion between professional and disciplinary training, and how these criteria make Social Work invisible or reduce it to an "applied profession." He concludes that disciplines are constructions in dispute and that their legitimacy requires articulated theoretical frameworks, knowledge, and practices.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read through the approach proposed by the TCCR, the argument becomes a grammar of disciplinarization: (1) formal object: psychosocial relationality narratively constructed; (2) analytical unit: narrative configurations on micro-meso-macro planes; (3) validity: inter-level coherence, relational effectiveness, and relational justice; (4) accumulation: cartographies of the Cognosystem and compared case series; (5) autonomy: conceptual repertoires and design/adjustment of cognosystemic memes. Thus, the TCCR institutes an endogenous epistemology that transforms practice into accumulable knowledge and sets its own rules of demarcation.
Article: “Epistemological issues of Social Work science as a translational action science”
Author: Hans-Jürgen Göppner (2012)
In this article, Göppner defends a "science of Social Work" as a translational action science that connects research and practice to respond to multiplex ("multilayered"/"multidimensional") problems. He asks not to start from practice, but to anchor it in foundations that allow for programming changes and avoiding harm. He rejects derivative eclecticism: models must be genuine, in "vernacular terms," capable of articulating micro, meso, and macro levels; integrative eclecticism can only be transitory. Thus, a scientific basis is built that ensures help that deserves that name.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR offers that theoretical "vernacular language" that Göppner demands: a metatheoretical framework that explains the relational construction of reality through Cognosystems and a systemic-relational ontology with its own second-order epistemology. With interconnected ecosystemic levels, the TCCR translates knowledge into multi-scalar change programming without exogenous dependence, opening an endogenous path of scientific development for the discipline.
Article: “Regarding the epistemological trends of Social Work in the Latin American context”
Authors: Nora Muñoz and Paula Vargas (2013)
The article by Muñoz and Vargas provides a balance of epistemological trends in Latin American Social Work (1998–2008) based on a review in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia. They argue that intervention is the founding axis of the disciplinary statute and demand a permanent epistemological construction that articulates understanding, explanation, and transformation of the object. They map matrices and trends (positivist, socio-critical, comprehensive), discuss the false theory-practice dichotomy, and propose a "founded intervention": rigorous, contextual, ethical-political, and supported by research, capable of connecting micro, meso, and macro levels.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR offers a closing and starting point for that debate: its own epistemology that defines as a formal object the psychosocial relationality narratively constructed and orders its reading in multi-scalar Cognosystems. From there, intervention ceases to be a technical appendix and becomes a design of semantic circulation between levels, with its own validity criteria (inter-level coherence, relational effectiveness, relational justice). This architecture allows for the accumulation of knowledge from practice, reduces exogenous dependence, and strengthens a situated and contemporary science of Social Work.
Article: “Embodying Social Work as a profession: A pedagogy for practice”
Authors: Maura Nsonwu, Kathleen Casey, Sharon Warren, and Noel Busch (2013)
Nsonwu, Casey, Warren, and Busch reconstruct the professional identity of Social Work from a feminist and empowerment pedagogy that reunifies "head, hands, heart, and soul." Based on pioneers (Addams, Richmond, Haynes, Robinson) and Rose's scheme, they criticize the fragmentation between theory and practice, the cognitivist hegemony, and technocratic standardization, and propose a holistic training where care, spirituality, and the "wisdom of practice" are integrated with evidence and ethics, situating field practice as the "signature" pedagogy of the profession.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, this framework embodies an endogenous key to scientificity: the Cognosystem orders head, hands, heart, and soul as co-determining narrative layers (conceptual frameworks, action devices, affectivity/care, and ethical-spiritual horizon) whose inter-level coherence produces valid and accumulable knowledge. The TCCR converts pedagogy into the design of narrative ecologies—not mere technical training—and recognizes the "wisdom of practice" as a legitimate source of theory, reinforcing a situated science of Social Work, with its own validation criteria and transformative capacity.
Article: “Reflections on the contribution of the epistemological foundations of the social sciences to Social Work: Contributions to the critical and propositional processes in professional praxis”
Authors: Yaneth Ortiz and Uva Falla (2013)
The article examines how four matrices of the social sciences—historical materialism, positivism, interpretivism, and complexity—have shaped research and intervention in Social Work and the definition of its ethical-political project. It presents a comparative synthesis of reality, subject, methods, and theories, and shows their translation into modes of relationship and intentionalities of intervention. It concludes by highlighting intersubjectivity, the use of multi-methods, and the reading of the micro to influence the macro in uncertain contexts.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
From the TCCR, that paradigmatic map is reordered in a relational key: reality is co-constructed in bonds and languages, so intervention articulates levels and meanings produced by the actors. The article's insistence on intersubjectivity and complexity converges with the endogenous epistemology of the TCCR, which organizes a science of the relational to generate situated and transferable knowledge, enhancing micro transformations with structural projection and an explicit ethical-political position of the professional.
Article: “Social Work as a transdiscipline: Towards a theory of intervention”
Author: María Belén Ortega (2015)
Ortega's article proposes conceiving Social Work as a transdiscipline to open the way to a theory of intervention based on research consistent with the profession and on epistemological vigilance. It distinguishes theory from mere systematization and poses three challenges: (1) inclusive and collaborative processes with a rights-based approach; (2) reversibility of diagnostic/intervention techniques into research resources; and (3) incorporation of the symbolic dimension—discourse, signs, rites, and performative acts—as an inseparable core of practices and structures. It suggests multi-scalar units (micro, meso, macro) and semiotic-ethnographic devices to capture meanings and guide change.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, Ortega's transdisciplinary turn is operationalized as an endogenous architecture of knowledge: the Cognosystem orders the micro–meso–macro planes and converts the symbolic dimension into analytical raw material (narratives, signs, performativities) to design interventions that modulate circulations of meaning. The proposed reversibility—transferring intervention techniques to research—fits with a science of the relational that validates by coherence between levels, contextual relevance, and relational effects. Thus, the TCCR offers its own framework to produce accumulable theory and program situated changes, reducing exogenous dependence.
Article: “Epistemological keys for Social Work”
Authors: Ana Belén Méndez, Cristina Caruncho, and José Ignacio Salazar (2016)
Méndez, Caruncho, and Salazar place the debate of Social Work in the transition to "scientific epistemology" and its three schools (neopositivism, critical rationalism, and post-Popperianism). They argue that, to found the field, one must assume a definition, a history, and a model of science; they locate Social Work as a human science oriented to action, with transformative potential and a rational, critical, and evaluative model articulated to a historical praxis. They question scientism, reopen the science-ideology link, and advocate for epistemic training, the ethics of care, and relational autonomy.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR responds endogenously to these keys: it defines a formal object (psychosocial relationality) and a systemic-relational ontology that couples theory and praxis without methodological monism. The Cognosystem maps the science-ideology plot in institutional and actor narratives, and sets validity criteria—inter-level coherence, relational effects, relational justice—to evaluate intervention and accumulate knowledge. Thus, it converts plurality into a disciplinary architecture and makes practice—not neutral—a laboratory of situated science.
Article: “The paradox of negation in social intervention”
Author: Juan Saavedra (2017)
Saavedra proposes to resolve the old dispute about the object of Social Work by resorting to a paradox: recognizing social intervention as its object and, simultaneously, denying its closure and exclusivity. He shows that locating it in "gaps" (problems/needs) or in mere relational systems does not delimit the discipline; and he criticizes frequent misconceptions that confuse intervention with execution, practice, or praxis. The paradox broadens the focus: intervention is a complex social phenomenon, transversal to several disciplines, whose observation requires epistemological vigilance and a sociohistorical reading of its regulatory devices.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, the paradoxical formula translates into a de-closure of the object: intervention is not a corporate patrimony but an arena for the circulation of meanings and power. In this sense, the TCCR provides its own framework to map these plots within the Cognosystem (micro–meso–macro), identify coupling points between professional, institutional, and community narratives, and design interventions as an engineering of meanings. Its validity criteria—inter-level coherence, relational effects, and relational justice—allow for the accumulation of its own knowledge without being subsumed by foreign paradigms.
Article: “Towards a science of Social Work. Epistemologies, subalternity and feminization”
Authors: Belén Lorente-Molina and Natalia Luxardo (2018)
The article traces a path towards a science of Social Work from three vertices: (i) epistemic debates on the nature of knowledge in the discipline; (ii) its subaltern position and power relations with other sciences; and (iii) the historical feminization of the knowing subject. Through a qualitative meta-analysis of 100 texts, it reviews currents (positivism, constructivism, critical realism, EBP, systematization), shows mechanisms of invisibility/appropriation of knowledge, and concludes that scientific autonomy depends on epistemic communities that make disputes explicit and recover absent knowledge.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, the text not only demands "autonomy" but a reform of the authorship regime of knowledge: who narrates and who is left out? The TCCR proposes a situated knowledge infrastructure where the formal object is psychosocial relationality and, therefore, subalternity and feminization are treated as narrative asymmetries. The Cognosystem allows for auditing flows of meaning (who cites whom, which narratives become hegemonic) and designing rebalancing devices—cognosystemic memes, institutional arrangements, pedagogies—evaluated by systemic consistency, relational power, and narrative equity. Thus, the discipline gains its own epistemology with an incorporated politics of recognition.
Article: “Reexamining epistemological debates in Social Work through american pragmatism”
Author: Kathryn Berringer (2019)
Berringer reopens the epistemological debates of Social Work in light of American pragmatism. She reviews the "progressive" narrative that, from John S. Brekke in his proposal to model a science of Social Work (2012)—with its own identity, domains, and constructs—to the agenda of the Grand Challenges for Social Work (AASWSW, launched 2015–2016), subordinates history and ethics to a scientificist imperative, and proposes another reading: pragmatism as a philosophy of the unity of thinking-doing, pluralism, relational self, and cooperative research/experimentation. She recovers historical omissions (Addams, Du Bois) to show how these legacies resignify evidence, practice, and pedagogy, and advocates for practice research and communities of inquiry as ways to reorder the field.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, Berringer's pragmatist program becomes infrastructure: the TCCR provides a formal object (psychosocial relationality) and a systemic-relational ontology to host the "unity" between knowledge and action in narrative ecologies (Cognosystem). Its situated validation—inter-level coherence, relational effectiveness, and relational justice—translates the pragmatist "cash value" into endogenous criteria. The community of inquiry is reconfigured as a participatory design of the circulation of meanings between actors and institutions. Thus, Social Work gains a specific and proper scientific path, without depending on exogenous frameworks misaligned with the nature of disciplinary action.
Article: “Construction of knowledge in Social Work”
Author: Susana Malacalza (2019)
In this article, Malacalza proposes an integral conception of the construction of knowledge in Social Work that breaks the binarism and positivist fragmentation. In a scenario of global capitalism, precariousness, and institutions in crisis, she reorients praxis towards emancipation and professional autonomy. She situates five axes—interdiscipline, strategy, creativity, power, and autonomy—and defends interdisciplinarity as an epistemic position that assumes disciplinary incompleteness. She rereads institutions as symbolic networks and fields of hegemonic dispute, and claims political, situated, and collective strategies to intervene in contemporary complexity.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
Read from the TCCR, this agenda becomes an engineering of endogenous knowledge: the formal object—psychosocial relationality narratively constructed—converts interdisciplinarity into conceptual interoperability; strategy, into a semantic architecture of intervention (supported by cognosystemic memes and institutional arrangements); creativity, into a recombination of repertoires; power, into an analysis of asymmetries in the circulation of meanings; and autonomy, into the governance of the Cognosystem. Validity is estimated by consistency between scales, interpretive traceability, and redistributive effects in the relational fabric.
Article: “Convergence of knowledges in the training of contemporary Social Work”
Authors: Milton Montero-Ferreira, Laura Galvis, and Maritza Jaimes
(2021)
This article proposes a "convergence model" for training in Social Work, anchored in complex thinking and oriented towards a permanent renewal of the curriculum. It prioritizes training in the global-local relationship, articulating knowledge, strengthening formative research, and critical thinking. It deploys a constellation of knowledges to be integrated—popular, disciplinary, interdisciplinary, technological, of academic participation, institutional, and intersectoral—and retakes Morin's "seven knowledges" to support a holistic, multidimensional, and ethical-political view of intervention. It concludes that convergence is expressed in interdisciplinarity, intersectorality, and inter-institutionality.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR can act as the "operating system" of that convergence. Its formal object—psychosocial relationality narratively constructed—allows for the orchestration of different knowledges as semantic flows within the Cognosystem (micro-meso-macro), defining interfaces between training, research, and intervention. From its endogenous epistemology, quality is evaluated by inter-level coherence, interpretive traceability, and just relational effects; thus, convergence ceases to be a sum of inputs and becomes governance of circulations of meaning, enabling the accumulation of its own theory and strengthening the scientific autonomy of Social Work.
Article: “‘Jack of All Trades and Master of None’? Exploring Social Work’s epistemic contribution to team-based health care”
Authors: Hannah Cootes, Milena Heinsch, and Caragh Brosnan (2022)
The article conducts a scoping review on the epistemic contribution of Social Work, specifically in health teams. It maps four themes: (1) indefiniteness and low visibility of the role ("what is my function?"); (2) knowledge hierarchies that install the stigma of the "jack of all trades, master of none"; (3) mediation and education function ("the glue"); and (4) anchoring in public health principles ("we think big"). It concludes that, even with epistemic confidence, the knowledge of Social Work is marginalized in biomedical teams and proposes Fricker's theory of Epistemic Injustice as a framework to investigate and reverse credibility deficits.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR increases disciplinary credibility not by "accommodating" foreign knowledge, but because it provides an expertise that no other profession possesses: the cognosystemic modeling of the relational ecologies that sustain (or erode) health. It defines a formal object (psychosocial relationality narratively constructed), an analytical apparatus (Cognosystem micro–meso–macro), and its own validity criteria (inter-level coherence, relational effectiveness, relational justice). With this, it installs standards and metrics of relational performance, guides team decisions, and positions Social Work as a specialized reference in diagnosing and programming changes in the relational architecture of care.
Article: “The study of the epistemology of contemporary Social Work from the intervention in the social as a scientific practice”
Author: Cristian Urbalejo (2022)
Urbalejo shifts the study of the epistemology of Social Work towards intervention understood as a scientific practice. He proposes the LCP triad—reading of reality, placement, and practice—as an axis to unravel how epistemic standards are embodied in action, instead of subordinating to theories of the social sciences. With this, he recenters the discipline, recovers its normative dimension, and guides the improvement of models and strategies under realistic and operational criteria.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
This LCP torsion converges with the TCCR, whose epistemology precisely situates psychosocial relational construction as an object and way of knowledge, articulated by its central concept: the Cognosystem. The TCCR offers internal criteria to audit reading, placement, and intervention (inter-level coherence, narrative plasticity, memetic traceability), producing its own, specialized, and verifiable framework that raises the scientific credibility of Social Work by regulating practice from within the discipline.
Article: “Social Work’s moral and epistemological pluralism”
Author: Michael Friedman (2023)
Friedman reframes the profession from a moral and epistemological pluralism: social work is, above all, a moral practice oriented towards well-being, with multiple identities (clinical, community, political) and diverse sources of knowledge (research, professional experience, traditions, ethical convictions). He defends the centrality of practice and field training, values evidence without reducing it to EBP (Evidence-Based Practice), and proposes programmatic evaluations when research is not enough. He warns against confusing "cultural competence" with a relativism that naturalizes injustices and calls for acting under uncertainty with critical judgment.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR offers a "structured pluralism": it preserves the diversity of knowledge that Friedman celebrates, but organizes it in an endogenous architecture with its own formal object (psychosocial relationality) and an analytical device (Cognosystem) to integrate practice, evidence, and ethical deliberation. Instead of unifying by elimination, the TCCR sets internal demarcation criteria—inter-level coherence, relational effectiveness, and relational justice—that allow for deciding under uncertainty, raising disciplinary credibility, and accumulating situated knowledge without depending on exogenous frameworks.
Article: “The epistemology of Social Work in the 21st century. New approaches and challenges in the construction of professional knowledge”
Author: Monis Mendoza (2022)
Mendoza (2025) outlines a panorama of the epistemology of Social Work in the 21st century: it shifts the center towards critical, inclusive, and situated approaches; revalues Participatory Action Research to co-produce knowledge with communities; and examines the incorporation of emerging technologies (e.g., data analysis, networks) in practice. With a qualitative methodology (case study, interviews, focus groups, and thematic analysis), it reports a high valuation of social justice, expansion of participatory methodologies, and demand for more flexible and reflexive curricula, while also alerting to ethical dilemmas in the use of data.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The TCCR offers the general "epistemological software" that this diagnosis calls for: its own formal object (psychosocial relationality narratively constructed) and an analytical device (Cognosystem) to orchestrate three fronts—participation, technology, and training—as flows of meaning between micro-meso-macro levels. Thus, PARs are read as the design of semantic circulation; data, as traces of bonds to be interpreted; and the curriculum, as an engineering of relational competencies. With internal validity criteria (inter-level coherence, relational effectiveness, and relational justice), the TCCR consolidates an endogenous and specialized path of scientific development for Social Work.
Article: “From epistemological obstacles to political-critical discoveries for the intervention of Social Work”
Authors: Borja Castro, Marcelo Piña, and Milton Contreras (2025)
The article proposes, in a philosophical-epistemological key, to broaden the horizon of intervention in Social Work through an epistemic matrix that allows moving from mere normalization to political-critical invention. Returning to Bachelard, it distinguishes a logic of error (obstacles in experience, general knowledge, and verbal expression) and a logic of discovery based on epistemological vigilance, with which it reorients the ontological, methodological, and political frameworks of the discipline. This rereading is nourished by empirical-analytical, hermeneutic-linguistic, and dialectical-critical traditions, and introduces the notion of "breaks with the breaks" to sustain a permanent critique of its own advances. Through historical and contemporary examples, the text illustrates minor and interstitial interventions that dispute neoliberal governmentality, and closes by calling for the articulation of ecosophies and economies of the common to overcome the dependence on a modern reason that narrows the imaginaries of transformation.
Linkage of the article with the TCCR.
The approach dialogues fruitfully with the TCCR: its demand for epistemological vigilance and "breaks with the breaks" can be operationalized through the cognosystemic scaffolding of the theory. Specifically, the TCCR allows (i) to map Bachelardian obstacles as failures in the narrative cognoscitivity and in the couplings between levels of the cognosystem; (ii) to design cognosystemic memes (categories, instruments, protocols) that avoid the crystallization of concepts and favor interpretive displacements between levels; and (iii) to guide minor interventions with metrics of narrative impact that shift the normalization-transformation axis towards more emancipatory configurations. Thus, the article offers a rich epistemic and political ground in a highly critical approach, and the TCCR a complementary epistemology with it, as well as analytical and design mechanisms to translate these philosophical reflections into traceable, contextually anchored, and iterable practices within professional intervention.
No comments:
Post a Comment