Journal of Ergonomics
Open Access

Digital Interface Ergonomics: Beyond Physical Comfort

Carina Arbelo^{* *}Correspondence: Carina Arbelo, Department of Human Factors, University of Lille, Lille, France, Email:

Author info »

Description

The rapid digitalization of work processes has expanded the scope of ergonomics far beyond its traditional focus on physical comfort and injury prevention. While musculoskeletal considerations remain important, today's knowledge workers interact with multiple software interfaces for hours daily, making digital interface ergonomics increasingly critical to productivity, well-being, and organizational performance. This article explains the current state of digital interface ergonomics and proposes directions for research and practice in this evolving domain.

Digital interfaces mediate nearly all modern work, from communication platforms to specialized software tools. These interfaces shape how information is perceived, processed, and acted upon-effectively functioning as cognitive environments that constrain or enable human performance. Yet despite their centrality to work processes, many interfaces receive far less ergonomic attention than physical workspaces. Organizations that meticulously assess chair height and monitor positioning often implement software without similar consideration for cognitive load, attentional demands, or information architecture. 

Research indicates that poorly designed digital interfaces contribute significantly to workplace stress, errors, and inefficiency. Studies demonstrate that employees spend approximately 20% of their work time searching for information within digital systems, while frequent context switching between applications can reduce productivity by up to 40%. The phenomenon of "technostress"-psychological strain resulting from technology interaction-correlates with increased absenteeism, decreased job satisfaction, and diminished work quality across sectors. These findings suggest that digital interface ergonomics represents not merely a usability concern but a fundamental occupational health issue. 

Several factors complicate efforts to improve digital ergonomics in workplace settings. First, organizations often prioritize feature expansion over interface optimization, leading to "feature creep" that progressively degrades usability. Second, standardization efforts face resistance due to legitimate variations in task requirements and user preferences across roles. Third, cognitive ergonomics lacks the visible injury markers that drive physical ergonomics initiatives, making intervention benefits harder to quantify through traditional metrics. Effective digital interface ergonomics begins with a fundamental shift in perspectiverecognizing software as a workplace rather than merely a tool. This reframing highlights the need for comprehensive assessment methodologies that evaluate interfaces according to cognitive ergonomic principles. These assessments should examine factors including attentional demands, working memory load, error tolerance, feedback quality, and compatibility with existing mental models.

Interface customization represents a promising but underutilized approach to accommodating individual differences in cognitive processing. Research demonstrates substantial variation in information processing styles, with some users benefiting from dense information presentation while others perform better with sequential disclosure. Similarly, color sensitivity, reading speed, and preferred interaction methods vary considerably across populations. Configurable interfaces that permit adjustment of information density, notification frequency, and input methods can accommodate these differences while maintaining necessary standardization of underlying functionality. Training requires reconsideration through the lens of digital ergonomics. Traditional training approaches often focus on feature familiarization rather than developing adaptive expertise in interface navigation and personalization. More effective approaches include guided exploration, contextual practice, and explicit instruction in metacognitive strategies for managing digital environments. These methods help users develop generalizable skills for adapting to inevitable interface changes rather than procedure-specific knowledge that quickly becomes obsolete.

The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence presents both challenges and opportunities for digital interface ergonomics. AIdriven features can potentially reduce cognitive load through intelligent information filtering, context-aware assistance, and automation of routine tasks. However, they also introduce new ergonomic considerations regarding appropriate trust, automation transparency, and interaction design for collaborative human-AI systems. Ergonomics professionals must engage actively with AI development to ensure these systems enhance rather than undermine human capabilities.

Conclusion

Organizations seeking to improve digital interface ergonomics should consider several practical approaches. Cross-functional collaboration between IT, human resources, and operations can ensure ergonomic considerations inform technology selection and implementation. User experience metrics should be integrated into technology evaluation frameworks alongside technical specifications and security requirements. Feedback mechanisms should be established to capture ergonomic issues that emerge during actual use rather than laboratory testing.