About Contact Help us

Join us ! Publish !

Interaction Design Foundation

Free educational materials - made by the world's technology elite

About sponsorships

References

Colin Runciman

iPad and tablet version

Publication statistics

Pub. period:1981-1986
Pub. count:4
Number of co-authors:3

Co-authors

Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:

Alan J. Dix:1
Nick Hammond:1
Harold Thimbleby:1

Productive colleagues

Colin Runciman's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:

Alan J. Dix:108
Harold Thimbleby:70
Nick Hammond:18

Calendar

May 20

CTS 2013 - The 2013 Intl. Conf. on Collaboration Techn. and Systems

May 22

Knowing (by) Designing 2013

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 18

“ It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them. ”

-- Steve Jobs, 1998

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

Colin Runciman

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by Colin Runciman (bibliography)

1986

Edit | Del

Runciman, Colin and Thimbleby, Harold (1986): Equal Opportunity Interactive Systems. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 25 (4) pp. 439-451.

“One view of interactive computer systems is that the user, having problems to solve, supplies the "givens" of these problems to the machine, which in response supplies as output the "unknowns". Reassigning or discarding these labels "givens" and "unknown" is a time-honoured heuristic for problem-solving. Also, people seem to prefer interpretations without such labels for fast interactive systems, and mere speed in systems that do embody fixed distinctions between input and output often contributes little towards ease of use -- it may only serve to emphasize a frustrating mechanical dumbness. We therefore apply the same heuristic to the design of interactive computer systems, noting that a number of existing successful interactive system styles can be viewed as the outcome if this approach.”

Edit | Del

Runciman, Colin and Hammond, Nick (1986): User Programs: A Way to Match Computer Systems and Human Cognition. In: Harrison, Michael D. and Monk, Andrew (eds.) Proceedings of the Second Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers II August 23-26, 1986, University of York, UK. pp. 464-481.

“To avoid bias towards machine issues in interactive system design it is proposed that processing to be performed by the human user should be expressed in user programs. The intention is to bring design closer to a human-centred approach without all the costs and uncertainties often associated with experimental prototyping. Topics discussed include the kind of cognitive architecture on which such programs might run, the kind of programming language in which they might be expressed, and the ways in which they might be developed and interpreted. Some specific proposals and examples are given, but these are intended as illustrative rather than definitive.”

1985

Edit | Del

Dix, Alan J. and Runciman, Colin (1985): Abstract Models of Interactive Systems. In: Johnson, Peter and Cook, Stephen (eds.) Proceedings of the Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers I August 17-20, 1985, University of East Anglia. pp. 13-22.

“We propose an abstract model for a large class of interactive systems. In these systems the user provides a sequence of commands that determines both a corresponding sequence of displays and a net effect or result. Editors, for example, usually fit this model. We show how our model can be used to address issues such as display laws, error correction, exception handling and command types. We give some formal statements of design principles, and also discover ways in which these interact or even conflict. Such results are of value whether or not a formal development method is used.”

Cited in the following chapter:

» Formal Methods: [/encyclopedia/formal_methods.html]

1981

Edit | Del

Runciman, Colin (1981): Modula and a Vision Laboratory. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 14 (3) pp. 371-386.

“A short description of Modula, the high-level language for real-time parallel programming, concentrates on its distinctive features as compared with Pascal; in particular the process, signal and three types of module are considered. VRW, a vision laboratory control program written in Modula is introduced. Its complete module and process structure is presented in support of the argument that Modula allows a most attractive program architecture which matches that of the laboratory and the experimental control problem. Detailed fragments of VRW are presented to illustrate the capabilities of Modula with special attention to device handling. Further benefits of the Modula discipline such as the inherent confidence possible in solutions and the merits of the module as a unit for software construction are discussed. In examining means of control over the use of machine-store, scalar types and, more particularly, the timing of events, weaknesses in Modula are noted and discussed. But these do not prevent the conclusion that it is a most capable and attractive language for laboratory control.”

Add publication