MCC (Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation) explored improving the relationship between people and computers through which primary discipline or technology focus?

Introduction / Context:
The history of AI and computing research in the United States features consortia like MCC that pursued advanced technologies and methodologies. A recurring theme in successful deployments is not only raw computation but how humans interact with systems—usability, cognition, and ergonomics.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• MCC investigated multiple domains, but the question targets work aimed at improving people–computer interaction.
• We are distinguishing among design automation, human-centered design, and architectural performance research.

Concept / Approach:
Human factors (also known as human–computer interaction or ergonomics) studies how people perceive, learn, and effectively use systems. It informs interface design, dialog structures, error handling, and workflow alignment—exactly the areas that improve the relationship between people and computers. While MCC also explored parallel processing and CAD technologies, those are primarily about performance or engineering productivity, not about the human–system relationship per se.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Identify which option directly targets user experience and usability.2) “Human factors” clearly focuses on the human–system relationship.3) Recognize that CAD and parallel processing are valuable but not primarily HCI disciplines.4) Select the human-centered option as the best fit.

Verification / Alternative check:
HCI literature and MCC program overviews emphasize user-centered research streams, participatory design, and cognitive engineering as means to improve the people–computer relationship.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Computer-aided design: Focused on design tooling; does not directly address human interaction broadly.
• Parallel processing: Improves speed/throughput, not the human relationship.
• All / None: Overinclusive or non-answers relative to the question’s focus.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating performance gains with usability; ignoring cognitive load, accessibility, and error tolerance.

Final Answer:
human factors