August 2026

July 2026

June 2026

May 2026

April 2026

March 2026

February 2026

January 2026

Ease of Being: Managing the stuff of everyday life

By Marvin Dainoff
Posted: 08/20/2026

This title of this blog is taken from mindfulness practice.  It reflects the reality that most of us use a lot of energy coping with the “stuff” that makes up our daily life.   My intention is to help you manage this stuff through the application of findings from the science and practice of ergonomics.    The goal is to use the least amount of effort to accomplish the mundane daily challenges so that you have enough energy to devote to those things that really matter.

 

Here’s how I got into this.  I got my PhD in cognitive psychology from University of Rochester in 1970 and began teaching at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio.  The world was just beginning to experience the transition to computerized workplace.   By 1979, public health officials around the world were describing what they called an “epidemic” of eye strain, and musculoskeletal disorders (pain in muscles and back.) I was recruited by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in Cincinnati to help deal with the problem.  Thus began my new life in ergonomics. 

 

Why were so many people complaining?  Like what is now happening with AI, organizations were jumping on the bandwagon to rapidly incorporate computer technology into their work processes without fully thinking through the implications.  The newspaper industry was one of the first venues.  NIOSH collected large numbers of vision and musculoskeletal complaints from newspaper employees.  Their investigations found that the new computer  equipment –typically large keyboards and monitors—had simply been placed on existing desks without modifying the environment.  

 

Consequently, employees were forced into uncomfortable working postures.   Moreover, unlike typewriters, which require the operator to pause periodically to insert a new sheet of paper, the computers allowed keying continuously without a pause.  Working for prolonged periods of time in awkward postures became the definition for a new medical condition: Repetitive Strain Injury (RSI).

At the same time, the typical monitors of the time were essentially modified TV screens.  The characters were created by dot matrix technology—typically bright points of light against a dark background.  Initially, characters were formed by a matrix of five columns and seven rows.  This presented several challenges to the operator. 

 

The glare problem.  Monitors consisted of a glass screen against a dark background.  This is the definition of a mirror.  Thus, any object behind the screen would be seen as a reflected image.   Lighting sources, such as rows of fluorescent bulbs in the ceiling, were a particular problem.  These images were superimposed over the text the operator was trying to read or create.  The monitor was vertical; thus, operators had to keep their heads erect making it more likely that reflected images would be in their field of view.  

 

Unlike today with screens everywhere, in the 1970s, people grew up learning to read printed text in the form of black characters on white paper.  With the new technology, the text appeared in a completely new form—requiring changes in the way the operator’s brain perceived text.  

 

The dot matrix characters presented a conflict to the operator’s visual brain.  The individual dots were visible to operators.  Thus, the brain would receive conflicting information: is this the letter A or a collection of dots?  This conflict interfered with smooth perception of text. 

 

There were other ways in which screen-generated text differed considerably from paper text.  Scrolling and copy/paste operations were unfamiliar experiences; violating expectations from reading printed text.   Also, a piece of paper with printed text can be rotated almost 90 degrees from vertical and still be legible.  There is no way that could be done with a 1970 monitor.  Finally, early monitors tended to flicker, leading to feelings akin to motion sickness.  

 

Then there was the eye glass problem.   Before computers, if someone needed glasses, their vision would be corrected for two functions; near and far.  The near correction enabled tasks such as reading a book held at arm’s length.  The far correction enabled tasks such as recognizing a person coming into your office or detecting oncoming traffic while driving.  However, the monitor viewing distances were in an intermediate zone: too far for the near correction, and two close for the far correction.  

 

The result was a companion disorder to Repetitive Strain Injury. It was called Computer Vision Syndrome.   These two problems were interrelated.  For example, a colleague called me asking if I could recommend an ergonomic chair for his secretary who was having back problems.  I ask him two questions: does his secretary wear bifocals and does she tilt her head backward while keying.  The answer was yes to both.  She was trying to read the text on the computer screen through the near correction at the bottom of her bifocals.  She got a new set of computer glasses and her back problems, which were actually head and neck problems, disappeared.  

 

This case exemplified my work at NIOSH. We would examine the total work environment looking at the interaction between visual and postural challenges.  We would then propose ergonomic design solutions to mitigate the challenges.   In brief, these design solutions included:

 

Providing adjustable chairs and workstations that allow operators to avoid awkward working postures.  In practice, this meant enabling neutral posture: defined as working at the mid-range of each major joint’s range of motion. That is, head and trunk erect, lower back supported, shoulders vertical, arms and wrists flat, upper leg horizontal, lower leg vertical, feet flat on the floor. 
Control reflected glare on the monitor. Take advantage of glare filters and computer-designed lighting which started to become available.  

 

Ensure that eye-glass prescriptions reflect the actual working conditions for people using computers. 

 

While at NIOSH, I designed and conducted a controlled study which demonstrated that these kinds of design changes reduce complaints and improve work performance.   As a result, I was able to work with professionals in furniture, lighting, and vision care to implement ergonomics commercially.

 

In later blogs, I discuss how these findings can be of immediate practical use in everyday activities.