The aim of this paper is to clarify the process by which individuals transform social representations while appropriating them and the way in which social representations influence on individual actions. Specifically, we will try to answer the following questions: Which are the characteristics of this process? Is it about active or passive internalization? Is it possible to study the concept of individuación (individuation) of social representations from a psychological point of view, regarding the concept itself and its formulation by social psychologies or is it necessary to reformulate it? Does the study of this process involve some kind of interdisciplinary activity? For this purpose, we shall raise the theoretical developments of two contemporary exponents of Psychology. On one hand, Duveen (2001) deals with the problem from the view of Social Psychology, appealing to Developmental Psychology as an instrument and he thinks of individuation amid interpersonal relationships. In this way he remarks that social representations do not act with regard to isolated individuals, but they rather act in pare interaction situations, resulting in the intervention of social and individual restrictions. However he is not able to specify the individuation process of social representations because he cannot adopt the child's point of view, in the way in which developmental psychology does. On the other hand, Valsiner (2003) deals with this problem from the perspective of developmental Cultural Psychology, focusing on the regulation of the flow of intrapersonal experience. His aim is to overcome the static version of social representations that have prevailed in empirical research. From his disciplinary perspective he considers social representations as social semiotic mediation artifacts, that enable individuals to pre-adapt to future events, making the experience of stability possible and integrating future anticipations of future and memories of the past. So, social representation constrains possibilities of action, enabling individual social representation to emerge. The author's main merit is the modification of Social Psychology standard version about the intra-subjective, because he analyzes the process by which an individual uses social representation to organize their experience. However, it is doubtful the use of certain typical concepts of the social representation theory that he uses and reformulates in terms of Developmental Psychology. The analysis of the arguments puts forward by both authors enable us to conclude that the problem of individuation leads to inevitable difficulties for those who deal with any of the mentioned disciplines. Despite researchers move in different problematic spaces, they share a common epistemic frame: the ontological assumption about a dialectic articulation between individual and society or between inter and intra subjective process. Therefore, we advocate for interdisciplinary activity, which is not only a rhetoric resource, but a base in a theoretical and methodological interchange at the moment of delimiting the object of study and to think of the research design. This resource will only be valid if it is focused from the perspective of conceptual discussion and empiric research based on a common epistemic framework. The problem of individuation refers to an object of study constituted by a system of interactions which components should be defined during the investigation itself. Now we face the challenge of studying complex systems. We consider that a dialogue between social and developmental psychologies has started and this should lead to the undertaking of joint investigations, which in time will become the right path for building a plausible explanation for this problem.

El objetivo de este trabajo es elucidar el proceso por el cual los sujetos transforman las representaciones sociales al apropiarse de ellas, así como también el modo en el que éstas inciden en la formación de conceptos y en las acciones individuales. Por una parte, Duveen (2001) plantea el problema desde la perspectiva de la Psicología Social, recurriendo como instrumento a la Psicología del Desarrollo y piensa la individuación en el interior de las relaciones interpersonales. Por otra parte, Valsiner (2003) aborda esta problemática desde la Psicología Cultural, centrándose en la regulación del flujo de la experiencia intrapersonal, con el objetivo de superar la versión estática de las representaciones sociales que ha primado en la investigación empírica. El análisis de los argumentos esgrimidos por ambos autores permite concluir que el esfuerzo de pensar este proceso desde cualquiera de las disciplinas mencionadas de manera independiente, lleva a dificultades que sugieren la necesidad de una actividad interdisciplinaria.

The belief in immanent justice was described by Piaget as existing only among children, although some studies describe its presence in adults. Social psychologists have identified the ideological belief in a just world, which is similar to immanent justice. Moreover, this belief coexists with others forms of explaining social injustice in a polyphase cognitive process, even in adults. A study was conducted to analyze the development of immanent justice in students between 6 and 17 years old. The conclusion is that the belief in immanent justice can be seen as a justification of the belief in a just world, framed in animistic thought, and transformed during the process of development into two other forms of justification: social reciprocity and individual merit.

La creencia en la justicia inmanente fue descrita por Piaget solo en niños, aunque algunas investigaciones señalan su presencia en adultos. Por su parte, la psicología social ha identificado la creencia ideológica en un mundo justo, similar a la justicia inmanente. Más aún, esta creencia coexiste con otras formas de explicación de las injusticias sociales en una polifasia cognitiva, incluso en adultos. Se realizó una investigación para analizar el desarrollo de la justicia inmanente en alumnos de 6 a 17 años. La conclusión es que la creencia en la justicia inmanente puede ser vista como una justificación de la creencia en un mundo justo, enmarcada en el pensamiento animista, que se transforma durante el proceso de desarrollo en otras dos formas de justificación: la reciprocidad social y el mérito individual.

This paper is framed in a discussion about the development of social knowledge. This investigation was made to study the relations between rational-individual knowledge and collective one. The belief in a just world and child's conceptions abut justice were taken as key concepts in order to analyze those relations. A descriptive study was carried out with a sample of 56 children, whose age was between 6 and 13 years-old. The results obtained would confirm Piaget asseverations about the notion of justice. However, they shows a belief in a tidy world which persist in subjects with a high moral development. We suppose it is an ideological background that imposes restrictions to the individual rational activity. This gives us elements to reconsider from a dialectic point of view the relationships between the individual construction and their social conditions of possibility.

Este trabajo participa en el debate acerca de la adquisición de conocimientos sociales. Con la finalidad de esclarecer las relaciones entre la elaboración individual de conocimientos y las creencias colectivas se realizó una investigación destinada a indagar las relaciones entre la creencia en el mundo justo y las conceptualizaciones infantiles sobre la justicia. Para ello se indagaron a 56 sujetos de 6 a 13 años de edad. Los resultados confirmarían los obtenidos por Piaget respecto de la noción de justicia, pero indicarían la presencia de una creencia en el orden del mundo que persiste en sujetos cuyas respuestas muestran un desarrollo moral avanzado. Creemos que se trata de un trasfondo ideológico subyacente a la creencia en un mundo justo que impone restricciones a la elaboración racional individual. Esto último, permite reconsiderar desde una perspectiva dialéctica las relaciones entre la construcción individual del conocimiento y sus condiciones sociales de posibilidad.