Concerning interpretations of activity theory

Activity theory (AT) is the most recognised part of Russian psychology outside Russia. However the general view of AT in international science is rather unilateral, lacking substantial aspects and areas necessary for proper understanding. This article is aimed at expanding the image of AT dominant in the mainstream which reduces the AT trend to A.N. Leontiev's theory. This reduction impoverishes the creative potentialities of the trend, and decreases the ability of AT to contribute to international science. We aim to reveal that AT is not limited to Leontiev's approach, to explain which ideas of the founders of AT, S.L. Rubinstein and L.S. Vygotsky, were pursued and which were rejected by A.N. Leontiev, and to assess another important contribution to the AT trend - the theory of B.G. Ananiev, where the ideas of AT's founders were developed which were not succeeded by A.N. Leontiev. Historical causes and consequences of the general reduction of the image of AT in the mainstream to Leontiev's theory are considered: why the discrepancies between views of Rubinstein, Vygotsky and Leontiev were hardly ever discussed in public and why other theories contemporary to Leontiev's theory were never given account appropriate to their value in Russia and remain almost unknown abroad.