User Experience of 7 Mobile Electroencephalography Devices: Comparative Study.

Clicks: 217
ID: 35830
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #67 of 91 articles by views in JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Registration of brain activity has become increasingly popular and offers a way to identify the mental state of the user, prevent inappropriate workload, and control other devices by means of brain-computer interfaces. However, electroencephalography (EEG) is often related to user acceptance issues regarding the measuring technique. Meanwhile, emerging mobile EEG technology offers the possibility of gel-free signal acquisition and wireless signal transmission. Nonetheless, user experience research about the new devices is lacking.This study aimed to evaluate user experience aspects of emerging mobile EEG devices and, in particular, to investigate wearing comfort and issues related to emotional design.We considered 7 mobile EEG devices and compared them for their wearing comfort, type of electrodes, visual appearance, and subjects' preference for daily use. A total of 24 subjects participated in our study and tested every device independently of the others. The devices were selected in a randomized order and worn on consecutive day sessions of 60-min duration. At the end of each session, subjects rated the devices by means of questionnaires.Results indicated a highly significant change in maximal possible wearing duration among the EEG devices (χ=40.2, n=24; P<.001). Regarding the visual perception of devices' headset design, results indicated a significant change in the subjects' ratings (χ=78.7, n=24; P<.001). Results of the subjects' ratings regarding the practicability of the devices indicated highly significant differences among the EEG devices (χ=83.2, n=24; P<.001). Ranking order and posthoc tests offered more insight and indicated that pin electrodes had the lowest wearing comfort, in particular, when coupled with a rigid, heavy headset. Finally, multiple linear regression for each device separately revealed that users were not willing to accept less comfort for a more attractive headset design.The study offers a differentiated look at emerging mobile and gel-free EEG technology and the relation between user experience aspects and device preference. Our research could be seen as a precondition for the development of usable applications with wearables and contributes to consumer health informatics and health-enabling technologies. Furthermore, our results provided guidance for the technological development direction of new EEG devices related to the aspects of emotional design.
Reference Key
raduntz2019userjmir Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Radüntz, Thea;Meffert, Beate;
Journal JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Year 2019
DOI
10.2196/14474
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.