Simulating the feel of brain-computer interfaces for design, development and social interaction

Quek, Melissa; Boland, Daniel; Williamson, John; Murray-Smith, Roderick; Tavella, Michele; Perdikis, Serafeim; Schreuder, Martijn; Tangermann, Michael

doi:10.1145/1978942.1978947

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Quek et al [22] developed a simulation tool for control in applications using a BCI but without the need of an actual participant and an EEG cap connected to the system. Various factors, such as error rate, nonstationarities due to a changing state of mind, noise, and delay, are incorporated in their models.…”

Section: B Dealing With Errors In Bcismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However useful this paper is, for our study this approach was unusable for a couple of reasons. The study by Quek et al [22] only simulates two classes (i.e., left and right), needs EEG data from users to generate a model, and would therefore be too time consuming and from a logistics point of view impossible for our intended experiment.…”

Section: B Dealing With Errors In Bcismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Much Control Is Enough? Influence of Unreliable Input on User Experience

Laar

Bos

Reuderink

et al. 2013

IEEE Trans. Cybern.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brain–computer interfaces (BCI) provide a valuable new input modality within human–computer interaction systems. However, like other body-based inputs such as gesture or gaze based systems, the system recognition of input commands is still far from perfect. This raises important questions, such as what level of control should such an interface be able to provide. What is the relationship between actual and perceived control? And in the case of applications for entertainment in which fun is an important part of user experience, should we even aim for the highest level of control, or is the optimum elsewhere? In this paper, we evaluate whether we can modulate the amount of control and if a game can be fun with less than perfect control. In the experiment users (n = 158) played a simple game in which a hamster has to be guided to the exit of a maze. The amount of control the user has over the hamster is varied. The variation of control through confusion matrices makes it possible to simulate the experience of using a BCI, while using the traditional keyboard for input. After each session the user completed a short questionnaire on user experience and perceived control. Analysis of the data showed that the perceived control of the user could largely be explained by the amount of control in the respective session. As expected, user frustration decreases with increasing control. Moreover, the results indicate that the relation between fun and control is not linear. Although at lower levels of control fun does increase with improved control, the level of fun drops just before perfect control is reached (with an optimum around 96%). This poses new insights for developers of games who want to incorporate some form of BCI or other modality with unreliable input in their game: for creating a fun game, unreliable input can be used to create a challenge for the user.

show abstract

Section: B Dealing With Errors In Bcismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Dealing With Errors In Bcismentioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Control Is Enough? Influence of Unreliable Input on User Experience

Laar

Bos

Reuderink

et al. 2013

IEEE Trans. Cybern.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A halfway solution is to move towards in vivo experiments in a RBCIE where subjects can proceed more or less freely while experimenters observe subject and device behaviour. In this perspective, a modular home design of the RBCIE will help to highlight interactions, to analyse required constraints and skills and to understand disability (Quek et al, 2011).…”

Section: Daily Life Usagementioning

confidence: 99%

Considering human factors in BCI experiments: a global approach

Botte-Lecocq¹,

Bekaert²,

Vannobel³

et al. 2014

Journal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Le développement de nouveaux systèmes d'aide à la personne est l'une des applications interface cerveau ordinateur (BCI) les plus probables à court et moyen terme. Contrairement à de nombreuses technologies d'assistance récentes, les systèmes BCI actuels ne résultent pas d'une approche de conception universelle. De nombreux auteurs ont montré l'importance de prendre en compte des critères comme l'adaptabilité, la flexibilité, et autres critères relatifs à l'ergonomie lors de la conception d'une interface BCI. Dans cet article, nous proposons un cadre de travail visant à accélérer le transfert des expérimentations BCIs des laboratoires de recherche vers les services cliniques puis aux domiciles des patients. Plus précisément, nous montrons l'intérêt de concevoir une salle d'expérimentation dédiée (RBCIE) où les interfaces BCI peuvent être testées et validées efficacement. ABSTRACT. The development of new enabling devices is one of the most credible short and medium-term applications of brain-computer interfaces (BCI). Unlike many other recent assistive technologies (AT), present BCI systems usually do not result from a "design for all" approach, since they are mainly effective for people suffering from severe motor disabilities. However, many authors have shown that it is crucial to take into account adaptability, flexibility, customisability and other ergonomics related criteria while designing a BCI-based AT. In this paper, we specify a framework that could expedite the transferability of BCI experiments from labs to clinical departments and later to patients' homes. We highlight the interest of designing dedicated experimentation facilities (RBCIE) in which the developed BCI systems can be efficiently tested and validated. More generally, we highlight the interest of a multidisciplinary design approach introducing human factors at the core of concerns.

show abstract

“…So we needed a substitute of which we could also be certain that the user has the level of control that we wanted to provide. We looked at various alternatives: simulating imaginary-movement-based BCI input [17], manipulating mouse input, [18], or issuing incorrect commands at selection level [19]. Carlson, et al evaluated the effect of shared control (with an AI) on driving a BCI-controlled wheelchair [20] using another alternative.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception and Manipulation of Game Control

Bos

Laar

Reuderink

et al. 2014

Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Brain-computer interfaces do not provide perfect recognition of user input, for similar reasons as natural input modalities. How well can users assess the amount of control they have, and how much control do they need? We describe an experiment where we manipulated the control users had in a keyboard-controlled browser game. The data of 211 runs from 87 individuals indicates a significant linear correlation between users' sense of control and the amount of control they really had in terms of mutual information (not accuracy!). If users know what they put in, they can assess quite well how much control they have over the system. In our case, from an amount of control of above 0.68 bits in mutual information (a 5-class accuracy of 65%), this aspect of control no longer seems to be the critical factor for finishing the game. Deliberate manipulation of perception may offer a way to make imperfect, uncertain input modalities more acceptable, especially in combination with games.

show abstract

Simulating the feel of brain-computer interfaces for design, development and social interaction

Cited by 13 publications

References 8 publications

How Much Control Is Enough? Influence of Unreliable Input on User Experience

How Much Control Is Enough? Influence of Unreliable Input on User Experience

Considering human factors in BCI experiments: a global approach

Perception and Manipulation of Game Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About