People have interacted with computers from
the start, but it took time for human–computer
interaction (HCI) to become a recognized field
of research. Related journals, conferences, and
professional associations appeared in the 1970s
and 1980s. HCI is in the curricula of research
universities, primarily in computer science, yet
it has not coalesced into a single discipline.
Fields with researchers who identify with HCI
include human factors and ergonomics, infor-
mation systems, cognitive science, information
science, organizational psychology, industrial
engineering, and computer engineering.
This article identifies historical, conceptual,
and cultural distinctions among three major
research threads. One thread extended human
factors or engineering psychology to comput-
ing. Another developed when mainframes
spawned business computing in the 1960s. The
third, focused on individual use, arose with
minicomputers and home computers and bur-
geoned with personal computing in the 1980s.
Although they share some issues and meth-
ods, these research efforts have not converged.
They emerged within different parent disci-
plines, at different times, and comprised differ-
ent generations of researchers. Approaches,
attitudes, and terminology differed. Two—com-
puter operation and information systems man-
agement—embraced the journal-oriented
scholarly tradition of the sciences; the third—
comprising cognitive and computer scientists—
has placed greater emphasis on conference
publication. In addition, each thread initially
emphasized a different aspect of computer use:
mandatory hands-on use, hands-off manageri-
al use, and discretionary hands-on use.
Designing for a use that is a job requirement
and designing for a use is discretionary can be
very different activities. These often unvoiced
distinctions contributed to the current state of
HCI research and may shape its future.
Human–tool interaction at the dawn of
computing
Highly specialized tools were developed
through the centuries to support carpenters,
blacksmiths, and other artisans. However,
efforts to apply science and engineering to
improve the efficiency of work practices
became prominent only about a century ago,
when time-and-motion studies exploited
inventions such as film and statistical analysis.
Frederick Taylor’s principles of scientific man-
agement1 had limitations and were satirized in
Charlie Chaplin’s film Modern Times, but they
were applied successfully to assembly line man-
ufacturing and other work practices.
World War I training requirements acceler-
ated efficiency efforts in Europe and the US.
World War II prompted intense interest in engi-
neering psychology as a result of complex
equipment used by soldiers, sailors, and pilots
that tested human capabilities. Aircraft
ergonomic design flaws—for example, in the
ejection system’s escape hatch—led to thou-
sands of casualties. After the war, aviation psy-
chologists created the Human Factors Society.
Two legacies of World War II were awareness of
the potential of computing and an enduring
interest in behavioral requirements for design
and training.2
Early approaches to improving work and
what at the time were called man–machine
interfaces focused on nondiscretionary use.
Assembly line workers were hired to use a sys-
tem; pilots were given planes—neither had a
choice in the matter. If training was necessary,
46 IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 1058-6180/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Three Faces of Human–Computer
Interaction
Jonathan Grudin
Microsoft Research
Human–computer interaction is considered a core element of
computer science. Yet it has not coalesced; many researchers who
identify their focus as human–computer interaction reside in other
fields. I examine the origins and evolution of three HCI research foci:
computer operation, information systems management, and
discretionary use. I describe efforts to find common ground and
forces that have kept them apart.