- Email: [email protected]
The scientific administration of science or is the administration of ergonomics scientific?
session illustrated several points - again the problem of putting too much in too little time and the range in the quality and legibility of overheads and slides. It was also a little disappointing that so many speakers read verbatim from prepared text. One paper, whilst interesting, proved to be a comprehensive literature search which might have been better presented in a written rather than a verbal form.
Software ergonomics Chairman: C. Marshall (GEC) The session on software ergonomics was a forum chaired by C. Marshall, with a panel consisting of J. Stevanton, (Seicon Ltd), C. Simmons (Rank Xerox Ltd) and N. Heaton (GEC). The chairman and the panellists each put forward some contentious issue and invited the floor to comment. No single session did more to highlight the need for this year's Society lecture than this one. The difference between those in 'Hi-tech' and those who were not was patently obvious; one comment from the floor which especially brought this home was from one delegate who was under the impression that the programming language Pascal was the latest thing in advanced computer languages. We may hope that this session made some inroads into redressing the balance, though there remained a fear that many ergonomists will still be frightened of the new technology. One particularly good point made by Jack Sandover was his plea to introduce computer ergonomics as an O-level subject aimed at the generation of games-playing school children.
The scientific administration of science or is the administration of ergonomics scientific? Chairman: t4. C. W. Stockbridge (MOD) This session was the most stimulating and thought provoking session in the conference. The question which Hugh Stockbridge raised was: 'The scientific administration of science or is the administration of ergonomics a science?' In the best tradition of a polymath, Hugh drew examples from many walks of life and from the various responses his original document had elicited. The lead-in paper by Hugh is strongly recommended.
Using ergonomics to market products Chairman: T. F.M. Stewart (Systems Concepts) Tom Stewart's parallel session was on using ergonomics to market products. The session contained papers and presentations by Tom Stewart on using ergonomics to market products, Suzette Keith (ITTE) on ergonomically
designed instruction manuals as a marketing plus, Roy Yates (British Telecom) on managing human factors in a market lead organisation and finally two brief presentations by Russell Manoy (Ogle Design Ltd) and Ian McLelland (ICE Loughborough). One conclusion which appeared was how very aware many ergonomists were of the need for ergonomics in marketing, though most seemed aware of the pitfalls which oversell and the provision of 'cook-books' could cause. This session more than any other addressed the main problems faced by an 'industrial ergonomist' and it was pleasing to see how well it was attended, but rather disappointing that it was a parallel session and the transcripts of some of the papers are not readily available.
Society Lecture The Society Lecture was presented by Prof Brian Shackel of Loughborough University. It was entitled 'Ergonomics in the Information Age'. The talk started in the late 1940s and finished somewhere around the year 2000. Ranging from the provision of shoulder braces (male 5s 6d, female 5s 0d), to the provision of MIT's wall-to-wail computing (one-off at $1 m). The lecture set the scene for ergonomics in the next 1 0 - 1 5 years. After emphasising the increasing growth of computer usage, he described information technology as "The co-ordinated application of knowledge about computers, communication and people so as to research, design, install, operate and maintain integrated interactive systems which service and satisfy human information needs". Human factors was the number one issue today and the human and computer were being increasingly looked at as interacting knowledge systems in which the computer became more of an equal partner than a servant. With this in mind it seemed ironic that important new work was still being published on basic ergonomics such as the angles and distances between keyboards, desks and seats. Environment problems were prevalent. Looking at the post-1990 scene, he commented that the passing of paper usage might be useful in preserving forests but that portable electronic books would give ergonomics problems in searching for information and could result in the loss of the browsing facility and the valuable serendipity aspect which was important in science. Learning may well be quicker using a keyboard than handwriting but by comparison speech inputs and outputs were some 5 - 1 0 years away. The wired
society with electronic mail, conferencing, journals, etc, was much nearer with many exploratory developments already such as Prestel, Homelink, BLEND, etc. In Japan, a whole township had been built as an experimental wired society. There were few people researching in expert systems and even fewer ergonomists with specialised knowledge. Questions arose as to who was in control, the human or the computer, and on this there was a choice between good and evil as there was with other tools. On the effect of computers on employment and jobs, he pointed out that people would still have an integrating role and there would be lots of traditional ergonomics work to do. Most of this would be on an evolutionary basis but one revolution was needed - to break the idea that work was synonymous with having a job. The information age could bring growth in the concept of fruitful leisure and there was therefore a need for ergonomists to look at the field of leisure activities. Intellectual skills, sensory motor skills and social skills would all be involved. A serious concern about information technology was its potential for isolation of the individual, hence the emphasis and importance on the leisure aspect.
Work physiology Chairman: Prof P. Davis (Surrey University) The relationship between metabolic loading and cognitive performance was discussed by T. Reilly (Liverpool Polytechnic). In a laboratory experiment subjects cycled for different levels of work load and were asked to add twodigit numbers. An inverted U-curve was fitted to the results. The effect was probably not caused by an increase in body core temperature. M.T. Sims (Institute of Occupational Medicine, NCB) began a presentation on handling mining supplies. L.A. Morris (also IOM) then arrived and took over as intended. The use of intra-abdominal pressure, measured using a small 'pressure pill', was investigated as a measure of strain on the worker. Practical loads as used in the mining industry were investigated. A rather conceptual paper from the USA was presented by W. Karwowski (Louisville and Cincinnati Universities). A model of an Intelligent Knowledge Based System for manual handling jobs was presented. Interesting, but one of the 'what are we going to do?' papers, not 'this is what we have done'. N.J. Clark (Loughborough University) presented a paper concerned with the PMV thermal comfort index. This index is being recognised in
Applied Ergonomics
December 1984
313
Software ergonomics Chairman: C. Marshall (GEC) The session on software ergonomics was a forum chaired by C. Marshall, with a panel consisting of J. Stevanton, (Seicon Ltd), C. Simmons (Rank Xerox Ltd) and N. Heaton (GEC). The chairman and the panellists each put forward some contentious issue and invited the floor to comment. No single session did more to highlight the need for this year's Society lecture than this one. The difference between those in 'Hi-tech' and those who were not was patently obvious; one comment from the floor which especially brought this home was from one delegate who was under the impression that the programming language Pascal was the latest thing in advanced computer languages. We may hope that this session made some inroads into redressing the balance, though there remained a fear that many ergonomists will still be frightened of the new technology. One particularly good point made by Jack Sandover was his plea to introduce computer ergonomics as an O-level subject aimed at the generation of games-playing school children.
The scientific administration of science or is the administration of ergonomics scientific? Chairman: t4. C. W. Stockbridge (MOD) This session was the most stimulating and thought provoking session in the conference. The question which Hugh Stockbridge raised was: 'The scientific administration of science or is the administration of ergonomics a science?' In the best tradition of a polymath, Hugh drew examples from many walks of life and from the various responses his original document had elicited. The lead-in paper by Hugh is strongly recommended.
Using ergonomics to market products Chairman: T. F.M. Stewart (Systems Concepts) Tom Stewart's parallel session was on using ergonomics to market products. The session contained papers and presentations by Tom Stewart on using ergonomics to market products, Suzette Keith (ITTE) on ergonomically
designed instruction manuals as a marketing plus, Roy Yates (British Telecom) on managing human factors in a market lead organisation and finally two brief presentations by Russell Manoy (Ogle Design Ltd) and Ian McLelland (ICE Loughborough). One conclusion which appeared was how very aware many ergonomists were of the need for ergonomics in marketing, though most seemed aware of the pitfalls which oversell and the provision of 'cook-books' could cause. This session more than any other addressed the main problems faced by an 'industrial ergonomist' and it was pleasing to see how well it was attended, but rather disappointing that it was a parallel session and the transcripts of some of the papers are not readily available.
Society Lecture The Society Lecture was presented by Prof Brian Shackel of Loughborough University. It was entitled 'Ergonomics in the Information Age'. The talk started in the late 1940s and finished somewhere around the year 2000. Ranging from the provision of shoulder braces (male 5s 6d, female 5s 0d), to the provision of MIT's wall-to-wail computing (one-off at $1 m). The lecture set the scene for ergonomics in the next 1 0 - 1 5 years. After emphasising the increasing growth of computer usage, he described information technology as "The co-ordinated application of knowledge about computers, communication and people so as to research, design, install, operate and maintain integrated interactive systems which service and satisfy human information needs". Human factors was the number one issue today and the human and computer were being increasingly looked at as interacting knowledge systems in which the computer became more of an equal partner than a servant. With this in mind it seemed ironic that important new work was still being published on basic ergonomics such as the angles and distances between keyboards, desks and seats. Environment problems were prevalent. Looking at the post-1990 scene, he commented that the passing of paper usage might be useful in preserving forests but that portable electronic books would give ergonomics problems in searching for information and could result in the loss of the browsing facility and the valuable serendipity aspect which was important in science. Learning may well be quicker using a keyboard than handwriting but by comparison speech inputs and outputs were some 5 - 1 0 years away. The wired
society with electronic mail, conferencing, journals, etc, was much nearer with many exploratory developments already such as Prestel, Homelink, BLEND, etc. In Japan, a whole township had been built as an experimental wired society. There were few people researching in expert systems and even fewer ergonomists with specialised knowledge. Questions arose as to who was in control, the human or the computer, and on this there was a choice between good and evil as there was with other tools. On the effect of computers on employment and jobs, he pointed out that people would still have an integrating role and there would be lots of traditional ergonomics work to do. Most of this would be on an evolutionary basis but one revolution was needed - to break the idea that work was synonymous with having a job. The information age could bring growth in the concept of fruitful leisure and there was therefore a need for ergonomists to look at the field of leisure activities. Intellectual skills, sensory motor skills and social skills would all be involved. A serious concern about information technology was its potential for isolation of the individual, hence the emphasis and importance on the leisure aspect.
Work physiology Chairman: Prof P. Davis (Surrey University) The relationship between metabolic loading and cognitive performance was discussed by T. Reilly (Liverpool Polytechnic). In a laboratory experiment subjects cycled for different levels of work load and were asked to add twodigit numbers. An inverted U-curve was fitted to the results. The effect was probably not caused by an increase in body core temperature. M.T. Sims (Institute of Occupational Medicine, NCB) began a presentation on handling mining supplies. L.A. Morris (also IOM) then arrived and took over as intended. The use of intra-abdominal pressure, measured using a small 'pressure pill', was investigated as a measure of strain on the worker. Practical loads as used in the mining industry were investigated. A rather conceptual paper from the USA was presented by W. Karwowski (Louisville and Cincinnati Universities). A model of an Intelligent Knowledge Based System for manual handling jobs was presented. Interesting, but one of the 'what are we going to do?' papers, not 'this is what we have done'. N.J. Clark (Loughborough University) presented a paper concerned with the PMV thermal comfort index. This index is being recognised in
Applied Ergonomics
December 1984
313