Controlling a Tactile ERP–BCI in a Dual Task

Thurlings, Marieke E.; Erp, J.B.F. van; Brouwer, A.; Werkhoven, Peter

doi:10.1109/tciaig.2013.2239294

Cited by 19 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several other studies have since observed similar results with P300, e.g. [21,27,6,12,11,13,15,9], and similar observations have also been made with motor imagery [29,16,10]. To this day, however, we are not aware of work specifically targeting the estimation of the cognitive demand of SSVEP-based BCIs.…”

Section: Related Worksupporting

confidence: 76%

Can I Think of Something Else when Using a BCI?

Évain

Argelaguet

Roussel

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BCIs are presumably supposed to require the full attention of their users and to lose accuracy if they pay attention to another task. This assertion has been verified with several BCI paradigms (e.g. P300). But the cognitive demand of the promising SSVEP paradigm had never been specifically assessed yet. We measured the accuracy of an SSVEP-based BCI used by 26 participants in various conditions of mental workload. Our analysis revealed that surprisingly, for this type of BCI, little attention is actually needed from participants to reach optimal accuracy: participants were able to successfully perform a complex secondary task (N-back) without degrading the BCI accuracy. The same observation was made whether visual or auditive attention was solicited. These results indicate that SSVEP is a low-demanding paradigm in terms of cognitive resources, and are encouraging for its use in complex interaction settings.

show abstract

Section: Related Worksupporting

confidence: 76%

Can I Think of Something Else when Using a BCI?

Évain

Argelaguet

Roussel

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Preferably, this would be in an environment with minimal noise affecting the brain and eye signals, but also situations where the signal is strong—e.g., low workload scenarios are beneficial when exploiting the P300 signal to distinguish between targets and non-targets (current study, Thurlings et al, 2013; Ries et al, 2016). An example that may capture these elements is robust image triage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search

Brouwer

Hogervorst

Oudejans

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

EEG and eye tracking variables are potential sources of information about the underlying processes of target detection and storage during visual search. Fixation duration, pupil size and event related potentials (ERPs) locked to the onset of fixation or saccade (saccade-related potentials, SRPs) have been reported to differ dependent on whether a target or a non-target is currently fixated. Here we focus on the question of whether these variables also differ between targets that are subsequently reported (hits) and targets that are not (misses). Observers were asked to scan 15 locations that were consecutively highlighted for 1 s in pseudo-random order. Highlighted locations displayed either a target or a non-target stimulus with two, three or four targets per trial. After scanning, participants indicated which locations had displayed a target. To induce memory encoding failures, participants concurrently performed an aurally presented math task (high load condition). In a low load condition, participants ignored the math task. As expected, more targets were missed in the high compared with the low load condition. For both conditions, eye tracking features distinguished better between hits and misses than between targets and non-targets (with larger pupil size and shorter fixations for missed compared with correctly encoded targets). In contrast, SRP features distinguished better between targets and non-targets than between hits and misses (with average SRPs showing larger P300 waveforms for targets than for non-targets). Single trial classification results were consistent with these averages. This work suggests complementary contributions of eye and EEG measures in potential applications to support search and detect tasks. SRPs may be useful to monitor what objects are relevant to an observer, and eye variables may indicate whether the observer should be reminded of them later.

show abstract

“…In addition, when a BCI is used as a control device in the context of a dual-task, for example to navigate in a game, BCI performance is even lower than in BCI-only tasks (Thurlings et al, 2013). Therefore, in order to achieve effective use of BCI outside the lab, it is highly important to increase BCI performance of gaze-independent BCIs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BCI performance of tactile ERP-BCIs (Brouwer et al, 2010 ; Thurlings et al, 2012a , b ) is generally lower than that of gaze-dependent BCIs (Thurlings et al, 2012a , b ). In addition, when a BCI is used as a control device in the context of a dual-task, for example to navigate in a game, BCI performance is even lower than in BCI-only tasks (Thurlings et al, 2013 ). Therefore, in order to achieve effective use of BCI outside the lab, it is highly important to increase BCI performance of gaze-independent BCIs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaze-independent ERP-BCIs: augmenting performance through location-congruent bimodal stimuli

Thurlings

Brouwer²,

Erp³

et al. 2014

Front. Syst. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gaze-independent event-related potential (ERP) based brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) yield relatively low BCI performance and traditionally employ unimodal stimuli. Bimodal ERP-BCIs may increase BCI performance due to multisensory integration or summation in the brain. An additional advantage of bimodal BCIs may be that the user can choose which modality or modalities to attend to. We studied bimodal, visual-tactile, gaze-independent BCIs and investigated whether or not ERP components’ tAUCs and subsequent classification accuracies are increased for (1) bimodal vs. unimodal stimuli; (2) location-congruent vs. location-incongruent bimodal stimuli; and (3) attending to both modalities vs. to either one modality. We observed an enhanced bimodal (compared to unimodal) P300 tAUC, which appeared to be positively affected by location-congruency (p = 0.056) and resulted in higher classification accuracies. Attending either to one or to both modalities of the bimodal location-congruent stimuli resulted in differences between ERP components, but not in classification performance. We conclude that location-congruent bimodal stimuli improve ERP-BCIs, and offer the user the possibility to switch the attended modality without losing performance.

show abstract

Controlling a Tactile ERP–BCI in a Dual Task

Cited by 19 publications

References 48 publications

Can I Think of Something Else when Using a BCI?

Can I Think of Something Else when Using a BCI?

EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search

Gaze-independent ERP-BCIs: augmenting performance through location-congruent bimodal stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About