Number of co-authors:15
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Susan Turner:13Manfred Kubitscheck:2Garry Milne:2
Phil Turner's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:David Benyon:45Susan Turner:13Elisabeth Davenpor..:12
Computer analyst to programmer: "You start coding. I'll go find out what they want."
-- Popular computer one-liner
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
Personal Homepage: iidi.napier.ac.uk/p.turner
Current place of employment: Edinburgh Napier University
Phil Turner is Director of Forest Products Research Institute at Edinburgh Napier University. He got Ph.D in Gas phase physics at Imperial College London, 1991. Also dr. Turner was Post doctoral researcher at Imperial College London. As professor in Biophysics he has a particular focus on quantum mechanics and how it can help to better understand cell wall formation. This work extends to the development of new, "bio-inspired" materials. His research sits within the Centre for Plant Science and Biopolymer Research (a research centre within FPRI which he lead).
One of his main occupation is the development of this area of research within the Forest Based Industry sector. This is focussed through his role as Chairman of COST Action FP 1105: Understanding wood cell wall structure, biopolymer interaction and composition: Implications for current products and new material innovation. From 2000-2005 he established the Forestry and Forest Products Research Centre as a partnership between the CSIR and the University of Natal. The centre had a diverse range of research activities supporting the Forest Based Sector, with a particular focus on fast growing plantation species including pines and eucalypts.
Publications by Phil Turner (bibliography)
McGregor, Iain, Larsson, Pontus and Turner, Phil (2011): Evaluating a vehicle auditory display: comparing a designer's expectations with listeners' experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2011. pp. 89-92.
This paper illustrates a method for the early evaluation of auditory displays in context. A designer was questioned about his expectations of an auditory display for Heavy Goods Vehicles, and the results were compared to the experiences of 10 listeners. Sound design is essentially an isolated practice and by involving listeners the process can become collaborative. A review of the level of agreement allowed the identification of attributes that might be meaningful for the design of future auditory displays. Results suggest that traditional auditory display design guidelines that focus on the acoustical properties of sound might not be suitable.
© All rights reserved McGregor et al. and/or their publisher
Turner, Phil (2011): Everyday coping: the appropriation of technology. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2011. pp. 127-133.
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2011): My grandfather's iPod: an investigation of emotional attachment to digital and non-digital artefacts. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2011. pp. 149-156.
Turner, Phil (2010): The anatomy of engagement. In: Proceedings of the 2010 Annual European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2010. pp. 59-66.
Motivation -- Definitions and theories of user experience are vague and conflicting. This paper suggests that an account based on engagement is a more useful approach. Research approach -- An account of engagement is presented which is based on an ontological description of everyday experience. Findings/Design -- The account has three distinct but closely related components. Firstly we see engagement as being positive (we characterize interaction as being re-active) and exploratory: it is this exploration which creates a 'space' in which engagement occurs. What we reveal in this space are the affordances of the artefact which we subsequently exploit. We engage with something and continue to do so because we enjoy doing so -- thus affect has an important role in engagement. Finally, we engage with technology because it allows us to achieve our purposes and these purposes are a reciprocal expression of ourselves. Research limitations/Implications -- Future work will add empirical support to the theoretically-based account. Originality/Value -- The work contributes to the understanding of how to design engaging user experiences. Take away message -- An ontologically-based account of engagement may be more tractable than the many more expansive accounts of user experience.
© All rights reserved Turner and/or his/her publisher
Burrows, Luke, Turner, Susan and Turner, Phil (2010): Re-creating Edinburgh: adopting the tourist gaze. In: Proceedings of the 2010 Annual European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2010. pp. 183-186.
Motivation -- The work described in this paper investigated the potential of a low fidelity desktop application using the metaphor of the 'tourist gaze' in conveying a sense of place. Research approach -- An exploratory study was used, in which an application was developed and evaluated by 25 participants. Findings/Design -- The results suggest that the simple, non-immersive representation of Edinburgh through augmented images and sound supported a reasonable degree of sense of place. Research limitations/Implications -- This was a small scale study and trials against other environments are required. Originality/Value -- Relatively economical applications of this type could be of value in resource-constrained contexts such as therapeutic arenas. Take away message -- Low fidelity virtual reality applications may be surprisingly effective if expectations are constrained.
© All rights reserved Burrows et al. and/or their publisher
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2009): Triangulation in practice. In Virtual Reality, 13 (3) pp. 171-181.
Turner, Phil (2008): Towards an account of intuitiveness. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 27 (6) pp. 475-482.
Intuitive systems are usable systems. Design guidelines advocate intuitiveness and vendors claim it -- but what does it mean for a user interface, interactive system, or device to be intuitive? A review of the use of the term 'intuitive' indicates that it has two distinct but overlapping meanings, namely intuitiveness based on familiarity and intuitiveness reflecting our embodiment (and frequently both). While everyday usage indicates that familiarity means either a passing acquaintance or an intimacy with something or someone, it will be concluded that familiarity might best be equated with 'know-how', which in turn is based on a deep, often tacit, understanding. The intuitive nature of tangible user interfaces will in turn be attributed to embodiment rather than tangibility per se. Merleau-Ponty writes that it is through our bodies that we 'prehend' the world. A number of disciplines now regard action-perception as so closely coupled that they are better considered as a dyad rather than separately. A modified treatment of action-perception coupling is proposed, with familiarity providing an epistemic core, as the basis of intuitiveness.
© All rights reserved Turner and/or Taylor and Francis
Turner, Phil (2008): Being-with: A study of familiarity. In Interacting with Computers, 20 (4) pp. 447-454.
How people learn to use an interactive device has always been an important field of research in human-computer interaction (HCI). The theoretical bases of which have ranged from the traditional cognitive perspectives through situated learning to collectivist -- social perspectives. Each of these has treated learning to use interactive devices in a typical dualistic manner with a clear distinction between "man and machine". However, in addition to simply using interactive technologies we also co-exist with them, a relationship which might be called being-with. For many of us, interactive technology has always been there (we are born into a world replete with it) and we have a deep familiarity with it. Familiarity, according to Heidegger, is non-dualistic; it is a fact of our existence, of our worldliness; it is one of the primary ways in which we relate to the world, and offers an alternate basis for thinking about how we learn to use technology. An empirical study of familiarity is presented involving a group of seniors learning to use a personal computer and the services it provides. The analysis of the resultant substantial body of interview and discussion group data lead to the conclusion that to become familiar with technology is to integrate it into one's everyday life -- an everyday life which is correspondingly reconfigured. Specifically, learning to use these technologies is better seen as changing the practices of everyday life to accommodate them. This dimension of being-with potentially has significant consequences for very many aspects of HCI. So, in addition to designing for ease of use; designing for experience perhaps we should now add designing for being-with.
© All rights reserved Turner and/or Elsevier Science
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2006): Place, Sense of Place, and Presence. In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15 (2) pp. 204-217.
Turner, Phil (2005): Affordance as context. In Interacting with Computers, 17 (6) pp. 787-800.
The concept of affordance is relatively easy to define, but has proved to be remarkably difficult to engineer. This paradox has sparked numerous debates as to its true nature. The discussion presented here begins with a review of the use of the term from which emerges evidence for a two-fold classification -- simple affordance and complex affordance. Simple affordance corresponds to Gibson's original formulation, while complex affordances embody such things as history and practice. In trying to account for complex affordance, two contrasting, but complementary philosophical treatments are considered. The first of these is Ilyenkov's account of significances which he claims are 'ideal' phenomena. Ideal phenomena occupy are objective characteristics of things and are the product of human purposive activity. This makes them objective, but not independent (of any particular mind or perception) hence their similarity to affordances. The second perspective is Heidegger's phenomenological treatment of 'familiarity' and 'equipment'. As will be seen, Heidegger has argued that familiarity underpins our ability to cope in the world. A world, in turn, which itself comprises the totality of equipment. We cope by making use of equipment. Despite the different philosophical traditions both Ilyenkov and Heidegger have independently concluded that a thing is identified by its use and that use, in turn, is revealed by way of its affordances/significances. Finally, both authors -- Heidegger directly and Ilyenkov indirectly -- equate context and use, leading to the conclusion that affordance and context are one and the same.
© All rights reserved Turner and/or Elsevier Science
Benyon, David, Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2005): Designing interactive systems : people, activities, contexts, technologies. Addison-Wesley
Turner, Phil, Milne, Garry, Kubitscheck, Manfred, Penman, Ian and Turner, Susan (2005): Implementing a wireless network of PDAs in a hospital setting. In Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 9 (4) pp. 209-217.
Hetherington, Richard, Crerar, Alison and Turner, Phil (2004): A Question of Realism. In: Proceedings of the 8th ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All 2004. p. 68.
We present the results of an exploratory study investigating the feasibility of using multimedia software to teach life skills to adults with learning difficulties. As a precursor to determining whether the clients would benefit from the software, we needed to address the issue of realism in visual displays, to discover if photorealistic images of a familiar kitchen and utensils were essential, or if the clients would be able to abstract and apply information from generic cartoon-like representations. The level of realism was varied in two sets of tasks: object recognition exercises and problem-solving scenarios. Realistic versions of each task contained photorealistic images, and the problem-solving scenarios used images and speech of a support worker known to the participants to supply feedback and prompts. Unrealistic versions used clip art images and a cartoon-style character instead of the support worker. Contrary to expectations, measurements of errors and reaction times revealed the level of realism to have a negligible effect upon user performance in both sets of tasks. What has emerged is the overwhelming effect of individual differences on the design and evaluation of learning software.
© All rights reserved Hetherington et al. and/or Springer Verlag
Turner, Phil, Milne, Garry, Turner, Susan, Kubitscheck, Manfred and Penman, Ian (2004): Towards the Wireless Ward: Evaluating a Trial of Networked PDAs in the National Health Service. In: Crestani, Fabio, Dunlop, Mark D. and Mizzaro, Stefano (eds.) Mobile and Ubiquitous Information Access - Mobile HCI 2003 International Workshop September 8, 2004, Udine, Italy. pp. 202-214.
Walle, Guy Van de, Turner, Phil and Davenport, Elisabeth (2003): A Study of Familiarity. In: Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT03: Human-Computer Interaction 2003, Zurich, Switzerland. p. 463.
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2002): A web of contradictions. In Interacting with Computers, 14 (1) pp. 1-14.
We describe our use of contradictions, a concept central to a popular formulation of activity theory, to derive requirements of a new technical system to support an administrative system. Contradictions are the underlying causes of disturbances in the free operation of workplace activities. We argue and demonstrate that the resolution of such contradictions can be used as the basis for the (user-centred) design of a new system. We conclude that contradictions are both conceptually valuable in understanding the design of systems and are of considerable practical use.
© All rights reserved Turner and Turner and/or Elsevier Science
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2002): Embedding Context of Use in CVE Design. In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 11 (6) pp. 665-676.
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (2002): End-User Perspectives on the Uptake of Computer Supported Cooperative Working. In JOEUC, 14 (2) pp. 3-15.
Turner, Phil, Turner, Susan and Horton, Julie (1999): From Description to Requirements: An Activity Theoretic Perspective. In: Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work 1999 November 14-17, 1999, Phoenix, Arizona, USA. pp. 286-295.
This paper demonstrates how activity theoretic concepts can be used in conjunction with an ethnographically informed approach to derive requirements on a work situation. We present a case study based on a series of collaborative design episodes, the structured description derived from it and show how a preliminary set of contextually-grounded requirements on supporting the design process can be created.
© All rights reserved Turner et al. and/or ACM Press
Turner, Phil and Turner, Susan (1997): Supporting cooperative working using shared notebooks. In: Hughes, John F., Prinz, Wolfgang and Schmidt, Kjeld (eds.) Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work 7-11 September, 1997, Lancaster, UK. pp. 281-296.
Turner, Phil, Rogers, Alex R., Turner, Susan and Ellman, Jeremy (1994): Seeing the Wood for the Trees. In: Stephanidis, Constantine and Carbonell, Noelle (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All November 3-4, 1994, Obernai, France. p. 6.
Turner, Phil (): . In: . .
Show this list on your homepage
Join the technology elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)06 Dec 2012: Modified29 Nov 2012: Modified
30 Oct 2012: Modified
04 Apr 2012: Added
04 Apr 2012: Added
04 Apr 2012: Added
03 Apr 2012: Added
03 Apr 2012: Added
29 Apr 2011: Added
14 Apr 2011: Added
26 Feb 2010: Modified
05 Jun 2009: Added
03 Jun 2009: Added
01 Jun 2009: Added
01 Jun 2009: Added
31 May 2009: Added
29 May 2009: Added
12 May 2008: Added
24 Jul 2007: Added
27 Jun 2007: Added
27 Jun 2007: Added
11 Jun 2007: Added
11 Jun 2007: Added
28 Apr 2003: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team