China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Toward Usability Evaluation for Brain–Computer Interfaces
Published in Chang S. Nam, Anton Nijholt, Fabien Lotte, Brain–Computer Interfaces Handbook, 2018
Ilsun Rhiu, Yushin Lee, Inchul Choi, Myung Hwan Yun, Chang S. Nam
Study results demonstrate that the stimulus modality most frequently used in previous studies was a visual stimulus (Table 29.4). Auditory stimuli and multimodal stimuli were used in four and three of the collected studies, respectively. The remaining studies did not use the stimuli for their BCI. The BCIs without stimuli used motor imagery, mental imagery, or attention level of subjects. Similarly, BCIs in most of the studies used visual feedback. Only two studies used auditory and multimodal feedback and one study did not use any feedback. Also, with respect to the location of the experiments, the most common collected studies were based on laboratory experiments. Only a few studies conducted field experiments in a subject’s home.
Selection of Action
Published in Christopher D. Wickens, Justin G. Hollands, Simon. Banbury, Raja. Parasuraman, Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, 2015
Christopher D. Wickens, Justin G. Hollands, Simon. Banbury, Raja. Parasuraman
In the laboratory, simple RT is investigated by providing the subject with one response to make as soon as a stimulus occurs. The subject may or may not be warned prior to the appearance of the stimulus. Four major variables—stimulus modality, stimulus intensity, temporal uncertainty, and expectancy—influence response speed in this paradigm.
The CoDIS Taxonomy for Brain-Computer Interface Games Controlled by Electroencephalography
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2023
Gabriel Alves Mendes Vasiljevic, Leonardo Cunha de Miranda
Exogenous control signals are those that require an external stimulus to be generated. This stimulus can be visual, auditory or somatosensory (e.g., vibro-tactile and thermal), and the control signals are based on the corresponding stimulus modality that was employed to generate it. Steady-state evoked potentials (SSEP) are elicited when the user focus on a repeating stimulus, such as a flashing light, that is generated at a certain frequency (Bablani et al., 2020). The most common form of SSEP signals are those based on lights (SSVEP; steady-state visually evoked potentials), in which the subject focus his/her gaze on a flashing light that is being generated at a frequency (usually in the 4–20 Hz range (Ladouce et al., 2022)) and the BCI system is able to detect this gaze by identifying the corresponding brain waves, which spikes at the same frequency of the stimulus (Z. Wang et al., 2019). Other forms of SSEP are also possible, such as SSAEP (auditory-based) (Punsawad & Wongsawat, 2017) and SSSEP (somatosensory-based) (Ahn et al., 2016).
On the selection of stimulus for the auditory variant of the detection response task method for driving experiments
Published in Traffic Injury Prevention, 2018
Kristina Stojmenova, Franco Policardi, Jaka Sodnik
ISO 17488 (ISO 2016) provides guidelines for the technical implementation for the visual and tactile presentation of DRT stimuli only. The described DRT variants can differ in stimulus modality (visual or tactile) and/or stimulus location (remote or head-mounted). The standard also includes instructions on how to gather and interpret data collected with this method and provides instructions on how to choose among the DRT variants depending on the type of secondary task used in the study. It is suggested that all DRT variants are suitable for evaluating the attentional effects on a driver's cognitive load caused by audio–vocal tasks (e.g., delayed digit recall task). However, for multimodal tasks, which also require visual attention (e.g., voice-operated IVIS where content is presented visually), the tactile DRT is preferred. In such cases, the tactile DRT is the best option because it avoids visual sensory/perceptual interference. For tasks that require manual interaction, a motor interference is present for all DRT variants because they all use the same response method.
TeleBCI: remote user training, monitoring, and communication with an evoked-potential brain-computer interface
Published in Brain-Computer Interfaces, 2020
Andrew Geronimo, Zachary Simmons
One of the challenges of executing strictly-regimented research in this population is the customization needed to adapt BCI to users of different functional abilities. The protocol design and evaluation in this study therefore utilized key aspects of user-centered design described by Kübler et al. [31]. Assessment of device performance used traditional metrics such as accuracy and communication speed, as well as the usability of the system and satisfaction of the BCI user and communication partner. The structure of the training sessions allowed for collection of the following repeated measures related to the participant team’s experience. Setup proficiency – The steps of teleBCI operation were grouped into three categories: physical tasks, (application and maintenance of cap and electrodes), non-BCI computer tasks (videoconferencing and general computer navigation), and BCI tasks (calibration of the eye-tracker, BCI2000 configuration and utilization, updating classifiers). The Guide log reported the time spent on each of these tasks. At the end of the session, both the participant team and researcher reported whether help was offered during completion of each task (yes/no) and the level of confidence in team self-sufficiency (a 4-item Likert scale ranging from ‘not at all confident’ to ‘very confident’). Additionally, the type of interaction between the researcher and the participant team, whether in-person, phone, or videoconference was recorded by the researcher.Data quality – Impedances achieved during cap setup, error and variance of eye gaze, and the amplitude and latency of evoked potentials were captured for each session.TeleBCI use Communication accuracy and effective bit rate, the latter derived from bits per selection and divided by trial length, were tracked over session. The calculation of bits per selection is given in [32] as , where N is the number of possible choices per trial (40 for a 5 × 8 speller) and P is the probability of a correct selection. Because the timing and number of flashes, stimulus modality, and type of speller all factor into the communication rate, the effective bit rate was chosen to provide a common comparison across the different system iterations. Also collected were the types of spellers and different accessories used.BCI Perceptions – The ATDPA assessed users disposition toward the P300 BCI AAC after the first and final sessions.