Usability and Workload of Access Technology for People With Severe Motor Impairment: A Comparison of Brain-Computer Interfacing and Eye Tracking

Background. Eye trackers are widely used among people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and their benefits to quality of life have been previously shown. On the contrary, Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are still quite a novel technology, which also serves as an access technology for people with...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neurorehabilitation and neural repair 2015-11, Vol.29 (10), p.950-957
Hauptverfasser: Pasqualotto, Emanuele, Matuz, Tamara, Federici, Stefano, Ruf, Carolin A., Bartl, Mathias, Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta, Birbaumer, Niels, Halder, Sebastian
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 957
container_issue 10
container_start_page 950
container_title Neurorehabilitation and neural repair
container_volume 29
creator Pasqualotto, Emanuele
Matuz, Tamara
Federici, Stefano
Ruf, Carolin A.
Bartl, Mathias
Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta
Birbaumer, Niels
Halder, Sebastian
description Background. Eye trackers are widely used among people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and their benefits to quality of life have been previously shown. On the contrary, Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are still quite a novel technology, which also serves as an access technology for people with severe motor impairment. Objective. To compare a visual P300-based BCI and an eye tracker in terms of information transfer rate (ITR), usability, and cognitive workload in users with motor impairments. Methods. Each participant performed 3 spelling tasks, over 4 total sessions, using an Internet browser, which was controlled by a spelling interface that was suitable for use with either the BCI or the eye tracker. At the end of each session, participants evaluated usability and cognitive workload of the system. Results. ITR and System Usability Scale (SUS) score were higher for the eye tracker (Wilcoxon signed-rank test: ITR T = 9, P = .016; SUS T = 12.50, P = .035). Cognitive workload was higher for the BCI (T = 4; P = .003). Conclusions. Although BCIs could be potentially useful for people with severe physical disabilities, we showed that the usability of BCIs based on the visual P300 remains inferior to eye tracking. We suggest that future research on visual BCIs should use eye tracking–based control as a comparison to evaluate performance or focus on nonvisual paradigms for persons who have lost gaze control.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/1545968315575611
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1725512454</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1545968315575611</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1725512454</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-dd9ee705bb8c97bf6f93046db044172c8816aa6677e0ccfcb5f252453cb9edcb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM9LwzAcxYMobv64e5IcvVSTNkmb4xj-GEwUtrFjSdJvt862mUkr7L83Y9OD4On74H3eg-9D6IaSe0rT9IFyxqXIEsp5ygWlJ2gYZByJjLHTvWY82vsDdOH9hpA4ySQ5R4M44InkdIhmC690VVfdDqu2wEvrPmqrCmxLPDIGvMdzMOvW1na1w6V1-B3stga8rLo1nsEXOMCvtgvGpNmqyjXQdlforFS1h-vjvUSLp8f5-CWavj1PxqNpZGJJuqgoJEBKuNaZkakuRSkTwkShCWM0jU2WUaGUEGkKxJjSaF7GPGY8MVpCYXRyie4OvVtnP3vwXd5U3kBdqxZs7_NQwjkNCRZQckCNs947KPOtqxrldjkl-X7K_O-UIXJ7bO91A8Vv4Ge7AEQHwKsV5BvbuzZ8-3_hN-7ce54</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1725512454</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Usability and Workload of Access Technology for People With Severe Motor Impairment: A Comparison of Brain-Computer Interfacing and Eye Tracking</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Pasqualotto, Emanuele ; Matuz, Tamara ; Federici, Stefano ; Ruf, Carolin A. ; Bartl, Mathias ; Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta ; Birbaumer, Niels ; Halder, Sebastian</creator><creatorcontrib>Pasqualotto, Emanuele ; Matuz, Tamara ; Federici, Stefano ; Ruf, Carolin A. ; Bartl, Mathias ; Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta ; Birbaumer, Niels ; Halder, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><description>Background. Eye trackers are widely used among people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and their benefits to quality of life have been previously shown. On the contrary, Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are still quite a novel technology, which also serves as an access technology for people with severe motor impairment. Objective. To compare a visual P300-based BCI and an eye tracker in terms of information transfer rate (ITR), usability, and cognitive workload in users with motor impairments. Methods. Each participant performed 3 spelling tasks, over 4 total sessions, using an Internet browser, which was controlled by a spelling interface that was suitable for use with either the BCI or the eye tracker. At the end of each session, participants evaluated usability and cognitive workload of the system. Results. ITR and System Usability Scale (SUS) score were higher for the eye tracker (Wilcoxon signed-rank test: ITR T = 9, P = .016; SUS T = 12.50, P = .035). Cognitive workload was higher for the BCI (T = 4; P = .003). Conclusions. Although BCIs could be potentially useful for people with severe physical disabilities, we showed that the usability of BCIs based on the visual P300 remains inferior to eye tracking. We suggest that future research on visual BCIs should use eye tracking–based control as a comparison to evaluate performance or focus on nonvisual paradigms for persons who have lost gaze control.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1545-9683</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-6844</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1545968315575611</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25753951</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Brain-Computer Interfaces ; Disability Evaluation ; Electroencephalography ; Event-Related Potentials, P300 - physiology ; Eye Movements - physiology ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Motor Disorders - complications ; Motor Disorders - diagnosis ; Neuropsychological Tests ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; User-Computer Interface ; Workload</subject><ispartof>Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 2015-11, Vol.29 (10), p.950-957</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2015</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-dd9ee705bb8c97bf6f93046db044172c8816aa6677e0ccfcb5f252453cb9edcb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1545968315575611$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1545968315575611$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,21806,27911,27912,43608,43609</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25753951$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pasqualotto, Emanuele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matuz, Tamara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Federici, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruf, Carolin A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bartl, Mathias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Birbaumer, Niels</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halder, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><title>Usability and Workload of Access Technology for People With Severe Motor Impairment: A Comparison of Brain-Computer Interfacing and Eye Tracking</title><title>Neurorehabilitation and neural repair</title><addtitle>Neurorehabil Neural Repair</addtitle><description>Background. Eye trackers are widely used among people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and their benefits to quality of life have been previously shown. On the contrary, Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are still quite a novel technology, which also serves as an access technology for people with severe motor impairment. Objective. To compare a visual P300-based BCI and an eye tracker in terms of information transfer rate (ITR), usability, and cognitive workload in users with motor impairments. Methods. Each participant performed 3 spelling tasks, over 4 total sessions, using an Internet browser, which was controlled by a spelling interface that was suitable for use with either the BCI or the eye tracker. At the end of each session, participants evaluated usability and cognitive workload of the system. Results. ITR and System Usability Scale (SUS) score were higher for the eye tracker (Wilcoxon signed-rank test: ITR T = 9, P = .016; SUS T = 12.50, P = .035). Cognitive workload was higher for the BCI (T = 4; P = .003). Conclusions. Although BCIs could be potentially useful for people with severe physical disabilities, we showed that the usability of BCIs based on the visual P300 remains inferior to eye tracking. We suggest that future research on visual BCIs should use eye tracking–based control as a comparison to evaluate performance or focus on nonvisual paradigms for persons who have lost gaze control.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Brain-Computer Interfaces</subject><subject>Disability Evaluation</subject><subject>Electroencephalography</subject><subject>Event-Related Potentials, P300 - physiology</subject><subject>Eye Movements - physiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Motor Disorders - complications</subject><subject>Motor Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Neuropsychological Tests</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><subject>User-Computer Interface</subject><subject>Workload</subject><issn>1545-9683</issn><issn>1552-6844</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM9LwzAcxYMobv64e5IcvVSTNkmb4xj-GEwUtrFjSdJvt862mUkr7L83Y9OD4On74H3eg-9D6IaSe0rT9IFyxqXIEsp5ygWlJ2gYZByJjLHTvWY82vsDdOH9hpA4ySQ5R4M44InkdIhmC690VVfdDqu2wEvrPmqrCmxLPDIGvMdzMOvW1na1w6V1-B3stga8rLo1nsEXOMCvtgvGpNmqyjXQdlforFS1h-vjvUSLp8f5-CWavj1PxqNpZGJJuqgoJEBKuNaZkakuRSkTwkShCWM0jU2WUaGUEGkKxJjSaF7GPGY8MVpCYXRyie4OvVtnP3vwXd5U3kBdqxZs7_NQwjkNCRZQckCNs947KPOtqxrldjkl-X7K_O-UIXJ7bO91A8Vv4Ge7AEQHwKsV5BvbuzZ8-3_hN-7ce54</recordid><startdate>201511</startdate><enddate>201511</enddate><creator>Pasqualotto, Emanuele</creator><creator>Matuz, Tamara</creator><creator>Federici, Stefano</creator><creator>Ruf, Carolin A.</creator><creator>Bartl, Mathias</creator><creator>Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta</creator><creator>Birbaumer, Niels</creator><creator>Halder, Sebastian</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201511</creationdate><title>Usability and Workload of Access Technology for People With Severe Motor Impairment</title><author>Pasqualotto, Emanuele ; Matuz, Tamara ; Federici, Stefano ; Ruf, Carolin A. ; Bartl, Mathias ; Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta ; Birbaumer, Niels ; Halder, Sebastian</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-dd9ee705bb8c97bf6f93046db044172c8816aa6677e0ccfcb5f252453cb9edcb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Brain-Computer Interfaces</topic><topic>Disability Evaluation</topic><topic>Electroencephalography</topic><topic>Event-Related Potentials, P300 - physiology</topic><topic>Eye Movements - physiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Motor Disorders - complications</topic><topic>Motor Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Neuropsychological Tests</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><topic>User-Computer Interface</topic><topic>Workload</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pasqualotto, Emanuele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matuz, Tamara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Federici, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruf, Carolin A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bartl, Mathias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Birbaumer, Niels</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halder, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Neurorehabilitation and neural repair</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pasqualotto, Emanuele</au><au>Matuz, Tamara</au><au>Federici, Stefano</au><au>Ruf, Carolin A.</au><au>Bartl, Mathias</au><au>Olivetti Belardinelli, Marta</au><au>Birbaumer, Niels</au><au>Halder, Sebastian</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Usability and Workload of Access Technology for People With Severe Motor Impairment: A Comparison of Brain-Computer Interfacing and Eye Tracking</atitle><jtitle>Neurorehabilitation and neural repair</jtitle><addtitle>Neurorehabil Neural Repair</addtitle><date>2015-11</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>950</spage><epage>957</epage><pages>950-957</pages><issn>1545-9683</issn><eissn>1552-6844</eissn><abstract>Background. Eye trackers are widely used among people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and their benefits to quality of life have been previously shown. On the contrary, Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are still quite a novel technology, which also serves as an access technology for people with severe motor impairment. Objective. To compare a visual P300-based BCI and an eye tracker in terms of information transfer rate (ITR), usability, and cognitive workload in users with motor impairments. Methods. Each participant performed 3 spelling tasks, over 4 total sessions, using an Internet browser, which was controlled by a spelling interface that was suitable for use with either the BCI or the eye tracker. At the end of each session, participants evaluated usability and cognitive workload of the system. Results. ITR and System Usability Scale (SUS) score were higher for the eye tracker (Wilcoxon signed-rank test: ITR T = 9, P = .016; SUS T = 12.50, P = .035). Cognitive workload was higher for the BCI (T = 4; P = .003). Conclusions. Although BCIs could be potentially useful for people with severe physical disabilities, we showed that the usability of BCIs based on the visual P300 remains inferior to eye tracking. We suggest that future research on visual BCIs should use eye tracking–based control as a comparison to evaluate performance or focus on nonvisual paradigms for persons who have lost gaze control.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>25753951</pmid><doi>10.1177/1545968315575611</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1545-9683
ispartof Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 2015-11, Vol.29 (10), p.950-957
issn 1545-9683
1552-6844
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1725512454
source MEDLINE; SAGE Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adult
Aged
Brain-Computer Interfaces
Disability Evaluation
Electroencephalography
Event-Related Potentials, P300 - physiology
Eye Movements - physiology
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Motor Disorders - complications
Motor Disorders - diagnosis
Neuropsychological Tests
Statistics, Nonparametric
User-Computer Interface
Workload
title Usability and Workload of Access Technology for People With Severe Motor Impairment: A Comparison of Brain-Computer Interfacing and Eye Tracking
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T03%3A24%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Usability%20and%20Workload%20of%20Access%20Technology%20for%20People%20With%20Severe%20Motor%20Impairment:%20A%20Comparison%20of%20Brain-Computer%20Interfacing%20and%20Eye%20Tracking&rft.jtitle=Neurorehabilitation%20and%20neural%20repair&rft.au=Pasqualotto,%20Emanuele&rft.date=2015-11&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=950&rft.epage=957&rft.pages=950-957&rft.issn=1545-9683&rft.eissn=1552-6844&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1545968315575611&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1725512454%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1725512454&rft_id=info:pmid/25753951&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1545968315575611&rfr_iscdi=true