skip to main content
10.1145/3313831.3376128acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Introducing Peripheral Awareness as a Neurological State for Human-computer Integration

Published:23 April 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this work we introduce peripheral awareness as a neurological state for real-time human-computer integration, where the human is assisted by a computer to interact with the world. Changes to the field of view in peripheral awareness have been linked with quality of human performance. This instinctive narrowing of vision that occurs as a threat is perceived has implications in activities that benefit from the user having a wide field of view, such as cycling to navigate the environment. We present "Ena", a novel EEG-eBike system that draws from the user's neural activity to determine when the user is in a state of peripheral awareness to regulate engine support. A study with 20 participants revealed various themes and tactics suggesting that peripheral awareness as a neurological state is viable to align human-machine integration with internal bodily processes. Ena suggests that our work facilitates a safe and enjoyable human-computer integration experience.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

a1-andres-presentation.mp4
Paper001VF.mp4

Supplemental video

References

  1. Dzmitry Aliakseyeu, Bernt Meerbeek, Jon Mason, Remco Magielse and Susanne Seitinger. Peripheral Interaction with Light. In Peripheral Interaction, Springer, 2016, 207--235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1007/978--3--319--29523--7_10Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Andres, et al. 2020. Future Inbodied: A Framework for Inbodied Interaction Design. In Proceedings of TEI Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3374920.3374969Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Josh Andres, Julian de Hoog and Florian 'Floyd' Mueller. 2018. "I Had Super-Powers When eBike Riding" Towards Understanding the Design of Integrated Exertion. Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3242671.3242688Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Josh Andres, Tuomas Kari, Juerg von Kaenel and Florian 'Floyd' Mueller. 2019. "Co-Riding with My Ebike to Get Green Lights". In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. ACM, 3322307, 1251--1263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3322276.3322307Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Josh Andres, m.c. schraefel, Aaron Tabor and Eric B. Hekler. 2019. The Body as Starting Point: Applying inside Body Knowledge for Inbodied Design. In Proceedings of Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3299023, 1--8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3290607.3299023Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Azami, et al. 2012. An Improved Signal Segmentation Using Moving Average and Savitzky-Golay Filter. Journal of Signal and Information Processing 3, 01, 39. 10.4236/jsip.2012.31006Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Saskia Bakker, Elise Hoven and Berry Eggen. 2015. Peripheral Interaction: Characteristics and Considerations. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 19, 1, 239--254. opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/33597Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Jared S. Bauer, Sunny Consolvo, Benjamin Greenstein, Jonathan Schooler, Eric Wu, Nathaniel F. Watson and Julie Kientz. 2012. Shuteye: Encouraging Awareness of Healthy Sleep Recommendations with a Mobile, Peripheral Display. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2208600, 1401--1410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/2207676.2208600Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Open BCI. 2019. Cyton Biosensing Board - Open BCI. https://shop.openbci.com/products/cyton-biosensing-board-8-channel?variant=38958638542.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Open BCI. 2019. Eeg Electrode Cap Kit. https://shop.openbci.com/products/openbci-eeg-electrocap.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. AE Blandford. 2013. Semi-Structured Qualitative Studies Interaction Design Foundation. discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1436174/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Marc Boucher. 2004. Kinetic Synaesthesia: Experiencing Dance in Multimedia Scenographies. Contemporary Aesthetics 2, 1, 13. hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.7523862.0002.013Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. 2006. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2, 77--101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Sasskia Brüers and Rufin VanRullen. 2018. Alpha Power Modulates Perception Independently of Endogenous Factors. Frontiers in Neuroscience 12, 279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.3389/fnins.2018.00279Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Elizabeth Churchill. 2015. Mhealth+ Proactive Well-Being= Well Creation. interactions 22, 1, 60--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Eric Cobb. 2014. Peripheral Vision Training. https://youtu.be/aunC2sSjvC8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ashley Colley, Lasse Virtanen, Pascal Knierim and Jonna Häkkilä. 2017. Investigating Drone Motion as Pedestrian Guidance. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. ACM, 143--150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3152832.3152837Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Daniel H De La Iglesia, Juan F De Paz, Gabriel Villarrubia González, Alberto L Barriuso, Javier Bajo and Juan M Corchado. 2018. Increasing the Intensity over Time of an Electric-Assist Bike Based on the User and Route: The Bike Becomes the Gym. Sensors 18, 1, 220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.3390/s18010220Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Jennifer R Dunn and Maurice E Schweitzer. 2005. Feeling and Believing: The Influence of Emotion on Trust. Journal of personality and social psychology 88, 5, 736. 10.1037/0022--3514.88.5.736Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Kevin Fan, Jochen Huber, Suranga Nanayakkara and Masahiko Inami. 2014. Spidervision: Extending the Human Field of View for Augmented Awareness. In Proceedings of the 5th Augmented Human International Conference. ACM, 2582100, 1--8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/2582051.2582100Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Umer Farooq and Jonathan Grudin. 2016. Human-Computer Integration. Interactions 23, 6, 26--32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3001896Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Umer Farooq and Jonathan T. Grudin. 2017. Paradigm Shift from Human Computer Interaction to Integration. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3049285, 1360--1363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3027063.3049285Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Elliot Fishman and Christopher Cherry. 2016. E-Bikes in the Mainstream: Reviewing a Decade of Research. Transport Reviews 36, 1, 72--91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1080/01441647.2015.1069907Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Wofgang Fuhl, Marc Tonsen, Andreas Bulling and Enkelejda Kasneci. 2016. Pupil Detection for Head-Mounted Eye Tracking in the Wild: An Evaluation of the State of the Art. Machine Vision and Applications 27, 8, 1275--1288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.10072Fs00138-016-0776--4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Abdullah Ghasemi, Maryam Momeni, Ebrahim Jafarzadehpur, Meysam Rezaee and Hamid Taheri. 2011. Visual Skills Involved in Decision Making by Expert Referees. Perceptual and Motor Skills 112, 1, 161--171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.2466/05.22.24.27.PMS.112.1.161--171Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Mhmoud Hassan, Florian Daiber, Frederik Wiehr, Felix Kosmalla and Antonio Krüger. 2017. Footstriker: An Ems-Based Foot Strike Assistant for Running. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 1, 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3053332Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Robert R Hoffman, Shane T Mueller, Gary Klein and Jordan Litman. 2018. Metrics for Explainable AI: Challenges and Prospects. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.04608.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Kasper Hornb and Antti Oulasvirta. 2017. What Is Interaction? In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3025765, 5040--5052. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3025453.3025765Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Safal Khanal. 2015. Impact of Visual Skills Training on Sports Performance: Current and Future Perspectives. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.15406/aovs.2015.02.00032Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Kyle Krafka, Aditya Khosla, Petr Kellnhofer, Harini Kannan, Suchendra Bhandarkar, Wojciech Matusik and Antonio Torralba. 2016. Eye Tracking for Everyone. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2176--2184. dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/111782Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Brian Casey Langford, Jiaoli Chen and Christopher R Cherry. 2015. Risky Riding: Naturalistic Methods Comparing Safety Behavior from Conventional Bicycle Riders and Electric Bike Riders. Accident Analysis & Prevention 82, 220--226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.016Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Ken APM Lemmink, Baukje Dijkstra and Chris Visscher. 2005. Effects of Limited Peripheral Vision on Shuttle Sprint Performance of Soccer Players. Perceptual and motor skills 100, 1, 167--175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.2466/pms.100.1.167--175Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Joeph Carl Robnett Licklider. 1960. Man-Computer Symbiosis. IRE transactions on human factors in electronics, 1, 4--11. 10.1109/THFE2.1960.4503259Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Gag Luo, Fernando Vargas-Martin and Eli Peli. 2008. The Role of Peripheral Vision in Saccade Planning: Learning from People with Tunnel Vision. Journal of vision 8, 14, 25--25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1167/8.14.25Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Changxi Ma, Dong Yang, Jibiao Zhou, Zhongxiang Feng and Quan Yuan. 2019. Risk Riding Behaviors of Urban E-Bikes: A Literature Review. International journal of environmental research and public health 16, 13, 2308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.3390/ijerph16132308Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Päivi Majaranta and Andreas Bulling. 2014. Eye Tracking and Eye-Based Human--Computer Interaction. In Advances in Physiological Computing, Springer, 39--65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1109/MAMI.2015.7456615Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Regan L Mandryk and Lennart E Nacke. 2016. Biometrics in Gaming and Entertainment Technologies. In Biometrics in a Data Driven World, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 215--248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1201/9781315317083--7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Rafel Ibáñez Molinero and Juan Antonio García-Madruga. 2011. Knowledge and Question Asking.Psicothema 23, 1, 26--30. pubmed/21266138Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Mueller, et al. Towards Designing Bodily Integrated Play. 2020. In Proceedings of TEI Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Mueller, et al. 2011. Designing Sports: A Framework for Exertion Games. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2651--2660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/1978942.1979330Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Florian "Floyd" Mueller, Josh Andres, Joe Marshall, Dag Svan, m. c. schraefel, Kathrin Gerling, Jakob Tholander, Anna Lisa Martin-Niedecken, Elena M, rquez Segura, Elise van den Hoven, Nicholas Graham, Kristina H, and Corina Sas. 2018. Body-Centric Computing: Results from a Weeklong Dagstuhl Seminar in a German Castle. Interactions 25, 4, 34--39. 10.1145/3215854Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Lennart Nacke, Michael Kalyn, Calvin Lough and Regan Lee Mandryk. 2011. Biofeedback Game Design: Using Direct and Indirect Physiological Control to Enhance Game Interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 103--112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/1978942.1978958Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Jeane Nakamura and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2002. The Concept of Flow. Handbook of positive psychology, 89--105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195187243.013.0018Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Wenya Nan, Daria Migotina, Feng Wan, Chin Ian Lou, João Rodrigues, João Semedo, Mang I Vai, Jose Gomes Pereira, Fernando Melicio and Agostinho C Da Rosa. 2014. Dynamic Peripheral Visual Performance Relates to Alpha Activity in Soccer Players. Frontiers in human neuroscience 8, 913. 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00913Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Wenya Nan, Feng Wan, Chin Ian Lou, Mang I Vai and Agostinho Rosa. 2013. Peripheral Visual Performance Enhancement by Neurofeedback Training. Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback 38, 4, 285--291. 0.1007/s10484-013--9233--6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Marianna Obrist, Sue Ann Seah and Sriram Subramanian. 2005. Talking About Tactile Experiences. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1659--1668. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/2470654.2466220Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. OpenBCI. 2019. Openbci_GUI. https://github.com/OpenBCI/OpenBCI_GUI/tree/master/OpenBCI_GUI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Jason Orlosky. 2014. Depth Based Interaction and Field of View Manipulation for Augmented Reality. In Proceedings s of the adjunct publication of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. ACM, 2661164, 5--8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/2658779.2661164Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Patibanda, et al. Motor Memory in HCI. In Proceedings of Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Tibor Petzoldt, Katja Schleinitz, Sarah Heilmann and Tina Gehlert. 2017. Traffic Conflicts and Their Contextual Factors When Riding Conventional Vs. Electric Bicycles. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour 46, 477--490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1016/j.trf.2016.06.010Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Rantakari, et al. 2016. Charting Design Preferences on Wellness Wearables. In Proceedings of the 7th Augmented Human International Conference 2016. ACM, 2875231, 1--4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/2875194.2875231Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. IBM Research. 2018. Trusting AI. https://www.research.ibm.com/artificial-intelligence/publications/2018/trusting-ai/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Ruth Rosenholtz. Capabilities and Limitations of Peripheral Vision. 2016. Annual Review of Vision Science 2, 437--457. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1146/annurev-vision-082114-035733Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Esther Salmeron-Manzano and Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro. 2018. The Electric Bicycle: Worldwide Research Trends. Energies 11, 7, 1894.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Alrecht Schmidt. 2017. Augmenting Human Intellect and Amplifying Perception and Cognition. IEEE Pervasive Computing 16, 1, 6--10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1109/MPRV.2017.8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. m. c. schraefel, et al. 2020. Inbodied Interaction 102: Understanding the Selection and Application of Non-Invasive Neuro-Physio Measurements for Inbodied Interaction Design. In Proceedings of Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. m.c. schraefel. 2019. In5: A Model for Inbodied Interaction. In Proceedings of Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3312977, 1--6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3290607.3312977Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Samarth Singhal, William Odom, Lyn Bartram and Carman Neustaedter. 2017. Time-Turner: Data Engagement through Everyday Objects in the Home. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, 3079122, 72--78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1145/3064857.3079122Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Shaun Sweeney, Rodrigo Ordonez-Hurtado, Francesco Pilla, Giovanni Russo, David Timoney and Robert Shorten. 2017. Cyberphysics, Pollution Mitigation, and Pedelecs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.00646Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Janet L. Taylor. 2016. Kinesthetic Inputs. In Neuroscience in the 21st Century: From Basic to Clinical, Donald W. Pfaff and Nora D. Volkow Eds. Springer New York (New York, NY), 1055--1089. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1007/978--1--4939--3474--4_31Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Bhavin Trivedi, Matthew J Kesterke, Ritesh Bhattacharjee, William Weber, Karen Mynar and Likith V Reddy. 2019. Craniofacial Injuries Seen with the Introduction of Bike-Share Electric Scooters in an Urban Setting. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1016/j.joms.2019.07.014Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Vaessa Vallejo, Dario Cazzoli, Luca Rampa, Giuseppe A Zito, Flurin Feuerstein, Nicole Gruber, René M Müri, Urs P Mosimann and Tobias Nef. 2016. Effects of Alzheimer's Disease on Visual Target Detection: A "Peripheral Bias". Frontiers in aging neuroscience 8, 200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00200Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Naomi Vanlessen, Rudi De Raedt, Ernst HW Koster and Gilles Pourtois. 2016. Happy Heart, Smiling Eyes: A Systematic Review of Positive Mood Effects on Broadening of Visuospatial Attention. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 68, 816--837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.07.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Naomi Vanlessen, Rudi De Raedt, Ernst HW Koster and Gilles Pourtois. 2016. Happy Heart, Smiling Eyes: A Systematic Review of Positive Mood Effects on Broadening of Visuospatial Attention. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 68, 816--837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.07.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. P Vermesch. 1994. The Explicitation Interview. Publisher: French original ESF. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324976173_The_explicitation_interviewGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Introducing Peripheral Awareness as a Neurological State for Human-computer Integration

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2020
        10688 pages
        ISBN:9781450367080
        DOI:10.1145/3313831

        Copyright © 2020 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 23 April 2020

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        Upcoming Conference

        CHI '24
        CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 11 - 16, 2024
        Honolulu , HI , USA

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format