skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Who Willed It?: Decreasing Frustration by Manipulating Perceived Control through Fabricated Input for Stroke Rehabilitation BCI Games

Published:06 October 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

To reduce frustration while performing no-risk tasks (e.g. in training and games) for BCI users, we propose increasing their perceived level of control through fabricated input - system-generated positive task outcomes. Two surrogate BCI studies injected fabricated input creating additional positive task outcomes to a 50% baseline. Users' perceived control increased significantly compared to the 50% baseline. In turn, frustration levels decreased. Fabricated input worked equally well in a game story context that provided an emotional stake in the protagonist's success and a simpler task lacking such incentives. People's number of input attempts during the tasks determined perceived control more than our controlled ratios of positive to negative task outcomes. Delays between users' input attempts and subsequent fabricated inputs further moderated their perceived control.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

V5chip235VF.mp4

Supplemental video

References

  1. Dollaporn Anopas, Massamon Horapong, and Yodchanan Wongsawat. 2013. BCI-based Neurorehabilitation and Prediction System for Stroke Patients. In Proceedings of the 7th International Convention on Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology (Gyeonggi-do, South Korea) (i-CREATe '13). Singapore Therapeutic, Assistive and Rehabilitative Technologies (START) Centre, Midview City, SGP, Article 28, bibinfonumpages4 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Alexander Baldwin, Daniel Johnson, and Peta A. Wyeth. 2014. The Effect of Multiplayer Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment on the Player Experience of Video Games. In CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1489--1494. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2581285Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Álvaro Barbero and Moritz Grosse-Wentrup. 2010. Biased feedback in brain-computer interfaces. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation , Vol. 7, 1 (Jul 2010), 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003--7--34Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Benjamin Blankertz, Claudia Sannelli, Sebastian Halder, Eva M Hammer, Andrea Kübler, Klaus-Robert Müller, Gabriel Curio, and Thorsten Dickhaus. 2010. Neurophysiological predictor of SMR-based BCI performance. NeuroImage , Vol. 51, 4 (July 2010), 1303--1309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.022Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Danny P.-O. Bos, Bram van de Laar, Boris Reuderink, Mannes Poel, and Anton Nijholt. 2014. Perception and manipulation of game control. In International Conference on Intelligent Technologies for Interactive Entertainment. Springer, Cham, 57--66. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319-08189--2_7Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Marc J. Buehner and Stuart McGregor. 2006. Temporal delays can facilitate causal attribution: Towards a general timeframe bias in causal induction. Thinking & Reasoning , Vol. 12, 4 (Nov. 2006), 353--378. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780500368965Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Irina Ceaparu, Jonathan Lazar, Katie Bessiere, John Robinson, and Ben Shneiderman. 2004. Determining Causes and Severity of End-User Frustration . International Journal of Human--Computer Interaction , Vol. 17, 3 (Sept. 2004), 333--356. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327590ijhc1703_3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Maria A Cervera, Surjo R Soekadar, Junichi Ushiba, José del R Millán, Meigen Liu, Niels Birbaumer, and Gangadhar Garipelli. 2018. Brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke motor rehabilitation: a meta-analysis. Annals of clinical and translational neurology , Vol. 5, 5 (2018), 651--663.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Mark Claypool, Andy Cockburn, and Carl Gutwin. 2019. Game Input with Delay: Moving Target Selection Parameters. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference (Amherst, Massachusetts) (MMSys '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 25--35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3304109.3306232Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Elizabeth Cowley, Donnel A. Briley, and Colin Farrell. 2015. How do gamblers maintain an illusion of control? Journal of Business Research , Vol. 68, 10 (Oct. 2015), 2181--2188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.018Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Ansgar E. Depping, Regan L. Mandryk, Chengzhao Li, Carl Gutwin, and Rodrigo Vicencio-Moreira. 2016. How disclosing skill assistance affects play experience in a multiplayer first-person shooter game. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3462--3472. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858156Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Pouyan Rafiei Fard and Moritz Grosse-Wentrup. 2014. The Influence of Decoding Accuracy on Perceived Control: A Simulated BCI Study. CoRR , Vol. abs/1410.6752 (2014), 1--4. arxiv: 1410.6752 http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.6752Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. W. James Greville and Marc J. Buehner. 2010. Temporal predictability facilitates causal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , Vol. 139, 4 (Nov. 2010), 756--771. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020976Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. W. James Greville and Marc J. Buehner. 2012. Assessing Evidence for a Common Function of Delay in Causal Learning and Reward Discounting. Frontiers in Psychology , Vol. 3, Article 460 (Nov 2012), bibinfonumpages460 pages. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00460Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. W. James Greville and Marc J. Buehner. 2016. Temporal predictability enhances judgements of causality in elemental causal induction from both observation and intervention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , Vol. 69, 4 (April 2016), 678--697. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1041535Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Sebastian Grissmann, Thorsten O. Zander, Josef Faller, Jonas Brönstrup, Augustin Kelava, Klaus Gramann, and Peter Gerjets. 2017. Affective Aspects of Perceived Loss of Control and Potential Implications for Brain-Computer Interfaces . Frontiers in Human Neuroscience , Vol. 11 (July 2017), 370. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00370Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Moritz Grosse-Wentrup, Donatella Mattia, and Karim Oweiss. 2011. Using brain-computer interfaces to induce neural plasticity and restore function. Journal of Neural Engineering , Vol. 8, 2 (Apr 2011), 025004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741--2560/8/2/025004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Pim Haselager. 2013. Did I Do That? Brain--Computer Interfacing and the Sense of Agency . Minds and Machines , Vol. 23, 3 (Aug. 2013), 405--418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-012--9298--7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Camille Jeunet, Emilie Jahanpour, and Fabien Lotte. 2016. Why standard brain-computer interface (BCI) training protocols should be changed: an experimental study. Journal of neural engineering , Vol. 13, 3 (May 2016), 036024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741--2560/13/3/036024Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Daniel Kahneman, Bernard Tursky, David Shapiro, and Andrew Crider. 1969. Pupillary, heart rate, and skin resistance changes during a mental task. Journal of Experimental Psychology , Vol. 79, 1, Pt.1 (1969), 164--167. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026952Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Terry K. Koo and Mae Y. Li. 2016. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine , Vol. 15, 2 (Jun 2016), 155--163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Johannes Kögel, Ralf J. Jox, and Orsolya Friedrich. 2020. What is it like to use a BCI? -- insights from an interview study with brain-computer interface users. BMC Medical Ethics , Vol. 21, 1 (Jan 2020), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0442--2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Robert Leeb, Serafeim Perdikis, Luca Tonin, Andrea Biasiucci, Michele Tavella, Marco Creatura, Alberto Molina, Abdul Al-Khodairy, Tom Carlson, and José dR Millán. 2013. Transferring brain-computer interfaces beyond the laboratory: successful application control for motor-disabled users. Artificial intelligence in medicine , Vol. 59, 2 (2013), 121--132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2013.08.004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. H. N. Alexander Logemann, Marieke M. Lansbergen, Titus W. D. P. Van Os, Koen B. E. Böcker, and J. Leon Kenemans. 2010. The effectiveness of EEG-feedback on attention, impulsivity and EEG: a sham feedback controlled study. Neuroscience Letters , Vol. 479, 1 (Jul 2010), 49--53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2010.05.026Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Ravikiran Mane, Tushar Chouhan, and Cuntai Guan. 2020. BCI for stroke rehabilitation: motor and beyond. Journal of Neural Engineering , Vol. 17, 4 (Aug 2020), 041001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741--2552/aba162Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Sean McCrea, Gregor Ger?ak, and Domen Novak. 2017. Absolute and Relative User Perception of Classification Accuracy in an Affective Video Game . Interacting with Computers , Vol. 29, 2 (March 2017), 271--286. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww026Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. John E. Muñoz, Ricardo Chavarriaga, and David S. Lopez. 2014. Application of hybrid BCI and exergames for balance rehabilitation after stroke. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (Funchal, Portugal) (ACE '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--4. https://doi.org/10.1145/2663806.2671211Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Andrew Myrden and Tom Chau. 2015. Effects of user mental state on EEG-BCI performance. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience , Vol. 9, Article 308 (June 2015), bibinfonumpages308 pages. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00308Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Christa Neuper, Reinhold Scherer, Miriam Reiner, and Gert Pfurtscheller. 2005. Imagery of motor actions: Differential effects of kinesthetic and visual--motor mode of imagery in single-trial EEG. Cognitive Brain Research , Vol. 25, 3 (Dec 2005), 668--677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.08.014Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Anton Nijholt, Danny Plass-Oude Bos, and Boris Reuderink. 2009. Turning shortcomings into challenges: Brain--computer interfaces for games. Entertainment Computing , Vol. 1, 2 (April 2009), 85--94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2009.09.007Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Antti Oulasvirta, Sunjun Kim, and Byungjoo Lee. 2018. Neuromechanics of a Button Press. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174082Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Viktoria Pammer, Jörg Simon, Karin Wilding, Stephan Keller, and Reinhold Scherer. 2015. Designing for Engaging BCI Training: A Jigsaw Puzzle. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (London, United Kingdom) (CHI PLAY '15). ACM, London, United Kingdom, 667--672. https://doi.org/10.1145/2793107.2810290Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Ander Ramos-Murguialday, Markus Schürholz, Vittorio Caggiano, Moritz Wildgruber, Andrea Caria, Eva Maria Hammer, Sebastian Halder, and Niels Birbaumer. 2012. Proprioceptive Feedback and Brain Computer Interface (BCI) Based Neuroprostheses . PLOS ONE , Vol. 7, 10 (Oct. 2012), 1--10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047048Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Xiaokang Shu, Shugeng Chen, Lin Yao, Xinjun Sheng, Dingguo Zhang, Ning Jiang, Jie Jia, and Xiangyang Zhu. 2018. Fast recognition of BCI-inefficient users using physiological features from EEG signals: A screening study of stroke patients. Frontiers in Neuroscience , Vol. 12, Article 93 (Feb. 2018), bibinfonumpages93 pages. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00093Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Suzanne C. Thompson, Wade Armstrong, and Craig Thomas. 1998. Illusions of control, underestimations, and accuracy: A control heuristic explanation. Psychological Bulletin , Vol. 123, 2 (March 1998), 143--161. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033--2909.123.2.143Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Bram van de Laar, Danny P.-O. Bos, Boris Reuderink, Mannes Poel, and Anton Nijholt. 2013. How Much Control Is Enough? Influence of Unreliable Input on User Experience . IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics , Vol. 43, 6 (Dec. 2013), 1584--1592. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2013.2282279Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Dirk Vanhooydonck, Eric Demeester, Marnix Nuttin, and Hendrik Van Brussel. 2003. Shared Control for Intelligent Wheelchairs: An Implicit Estimation of the User Intention. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Advances in Service Robotics (ASER '03). Citeseer, Bardolino, 176--182.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Stephan A. G. Wensveen, J. P. Djajadiningrat, and C. J. Overbeeke. 2004. Interaction frogger: a design framework to couple action and function through feedback and feedforward. In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Designing interactive systems processes, practices, methods, and techniques (Cambridge, MA, USA) (DIS '04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177--184. https://doi.org/10.1145/1013115.1013140Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Jonathan R Wolpaw, Niels Birbaumer, Dennis J McFarland, Gert Pfurtscheller, and Theresa M Vaughan. 2002. Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control. Clinical Neurophysiology , Vol. 113, 6 (June 2002), 767--791. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1388--2457(02)00057--3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Thorsten O. Zander and Christian Kothe. 2011. Towards passive brain-computer interfaces: applying brain-computer interface technology to human-machine systems in general. Journal of Neural Engineering , Vol. 8, 2 (Apr 2011), 025005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741--2560/8/2/025005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Andéol Évain, Ferran Argelaguet, Anthony Strock, Nicolas Roussel, Géry Casiez, and Anatole Lécuyer. 2016. Influence of Error Rate on Frustration of BCI Users. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 248--251. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909132.2909278Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Who Willed It?: Decreasing Frustration by Manipulating Perceived Control through Fabricated Input for Stroke Rehabilitation BCI Games

          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

          Full Access

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader
          About Cookies On This Site

          We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

          Learn more

          Got it!