Actual and Imagined Movement in BCI Gaming

Most research on Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) focuses\ud on developing ways of expression for disabled people who are\ud not able to communicate through other means. Recently it has been\ud shown that BCI can also be used in games to give users a richer experience\ud and new ways to interact with a computer or game console.\ud This paper describes research conducted to find out what the differences\ud are between using actual and imagined movement as modalities\ud in a BCI game. Results show that there are significant differences\ud in user experience and that actual movement is a more robust way of\ud communicating through a BCI

BrainBrush, a multimodal application for creative expressivity

We combined the new developments of multimodal Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) and wireless EEG headsets with art by creating BrainBrush. Users can paint on a virtual canvas by moving their heads, blinking their eyes and performing selections using a P300 BCI. A qualitative evaluation (n=13) was done. A questionnaire was administered and structured interviews were conducted to assess the usability and user experience of the system. Most participants were able to achieve good control over the modalities and able to express themselves creatively. The user experience of the modalities varied. The use of head movement was considered most positive with the use of eye blinks coming in second. Users were less positive about the use of the BCI because of the low reliability and higher relative cost of an error. Even though the reliability of the BCI was low, the BCI was considered to have an added value: the use of BCI was considered to be fun and interesting

Human-Computer Interaction for BCI Games: Usability and User Experience

Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) come with a lot of issues, such as delays, bad recognition, long training times, and cumbersome hardware. Gamers are a large potential target group for this new interaction modality, but why would healthy subjects want to use it? BCI provides a combination of information and features that no other input modality can offer. But for general acceptance of this technology, usability and user experience will need to be taken into account when designing such systems. This paper discusses the consequences of applying knowledge from Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to the design of BCI for games. The integration of HCI with BCI is illustrated by research examples and showcases, intended to take this promising technology out of the lab. Future research needs to move beyond feasibility tests, to prove that BCI is also applicable in realistic, real-world settings

Experiencing Brain-Computer Interface Control

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are systems that extract information from the user’s brain activity and employ it in some way in an interactive system. While historically BCIs were mainly catered towards paralyzed or otherwise physically handicapped users, the last couple of years applications with a focus on entertainment meant for healthy users gained a lot of momentum in research. While from a disabled user’s perspective functionality and accuracy have been key to get a working system, especially for healthy users the user’s experience (UX) can be considered even more important. A vast amount of effort has been put into increasing the accuracy of various types of BCIs, less research has been done on the impact this accuracy has on the UX. This thesis is structured in the following way: I Introduction, II Studies and III conclusion. Within part II, 4 systems and experiments are conducted and described. With these experiments we try to show what the influence of accuracy on the UX is. In the first chapter of Part II we outline an experiment in which a large group of users played a simulation of various levels of control (similar to the way a BCI works). This online experiment consisted of a rather simple game in which users controlled a fictituous hamster with a fixed amount of control. After every level of control the user answered a short questionnaire on UX. We found that for the lower half of the control scale, a linear relationship exists between control and the fun a user experiences. The interesting finding was that for higher levels of control, fun reaches an optimum and even tends to decrease above a certain level of control. The non perfect control could make the game more interesting to people, an indiciation that we can use a BCI to make a game more challenging and interesting. In the second chapter we describe an experiment which compares the modalities of using actual movements and imagined movements (or Motor Imagery, MI) in an Event Related (De)Synchronization (ERD/ERS) based BCI. Within the group of 20 participants the average accuracy was higher for actual movement, but most participants found imagined movement to be more challenging and fun. MI is a popular paradigm within the field of BCI, especially physically handicapped or paralyzed users can still use their brain activity to control such a system. For healthy users however, we can still use the signals from actual movements as well. Which and why signals fare better is discussed in this chapter. Building on the first and second chapters in which we simulated a BCI and in which the input was solely from a BCI; in the third chapter we looked at whether a game with combined keyboard, mouse and BCI input would be favoured against the classical game with just keyboard and mouse. In a large study with 48 participants we found that the participants enjoyed playing the game with BCI control as long as the one without the use of a BCI, while their level of perceived control was significantly lower in the game with the use of BCI. This chapter shows us that by implementing the BCI input in such a way that it’s not detrimental to the UX (i.e. not frustrating or boring) the advantages (i.e. interesting new technology, a different modality to master besides hand-eye coordination) can overcome the disadvantages. In the fourth chapter, we present BrainBrush, a system that takes input from three different modalities: brain activity (by means of the P300 in the EEG), eye blinks (also from the EEG) and head movement (by means of a gyroscope). The experiment that was carried out is of a qualitative nature but also used a well-validated questionnaire for the usability of the system. After two design iterations the final results show that a system including multiple modalities can be engineered which can measure itself with conventional (i.e. not using brain activity) systems. What we see is that these physiological signals can result in lower control for some, with careful design the system can still be useful and provide a good experience. From the results of all these studies we can draw the conclusion that using a BCI as an input channel can make a game or system more challenging and interesting, although it’s far from perfect as a controller. However, care has to be taken when implementing a BCIbased input. By evaluating the UX in user studies we are able to see whether the BCI just frustrates the user or adds an extra dimensio

User Experience Evaluation in BCI: Bridge the Gap

While there is a gap between user-centered human-computer interaction (HCI) research and the more technology driven brain-computer interface (BCI) research, there are numerous possibilities and advantages for the two fields to help each other. Methods to evaluate the user experience of BCI systems include: 1) involvement of users in the design process, 2) administration of standardized questionnaires, 3) assessment of cognitive and physiological state

Evaluating user experience of actual and imagined movement in BCI gaming

Most research on Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) focuses on developing ways of expression for disabled people who are not able to communicate through other means. Recently it has been shown that BCI can also be used in games to give users a richer experience and new ways to interact with a computer or game console. This paper describes research conducted to find out what the differences are between using actual and imagined movement as modalities in a BCI game. Results show that there are significant differences in user experience and that actual movement is a more robust way of communicating through a BCI

Perspectives on User Experience Evaluation of Brain-Computer Interfaces

The research on brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) is pushing hard to bring technologies out of the lab and into society and onto the market. The nascent merge between the field of BCI and human-computer interaction (HCI) is paving the way for new applications such as BCI-controlled gaming. The evaluation or success of BCI technologies is often based on how accurate the control of a user is with the technology. However, while this is still key to its usability, other factors that influence the user experience (UX) can make or break a technology. In this paper we first review studies which investigated user experience with BCIs. Second, we will discuss how HCI approaches can contribute to the evaluation of BCIs. Finally, we propose to develop a standardized questionnaire for evaluating BCIs for entertainment purposes

Experiencing BCI control in a popular computer game

Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) are not only being developed to aid disabled individuals with motor substitution, motor recovery, and novel communication possibilities, but also as a modality for healthy users in entertainment and gaming. This study investigates whether the incorporation of a BCI in the popular game World of Warcraft (WoW) has effects on the user experience. A BCI control channel based on parietal alpha band power is used to control the shape and function of the avatar in the game. In the experiment, participants , a mix of experienced and inexperienced WoW players, played with and without the use of BCI in a within-subjects design. Participants themselves could indicate when they wanted to stop playing. Actual and estimated duration was recorded and questionnaires on presence and control were administered. Afterwards, oral interviews were taken. No difference in actual duration was found between conditions. Results indicate that the difference between estimated and actual duration was not related to user experience but was person specific. When using a BCI, control and involvement were rated lower. But BCI control did not significantly decrease fun. During interviews, experienced players stated that they saw potential in the application of BCIs in games with complex interfaces such as WoW. This study suggests that BCI as an additional control can be as much fun and natural to use as keyboard/mouse control, even if the amount of control is limited

Developing Educational and Entertaining Virtual Humans using Elckerlyc

Virtual humans (VHs) are used in many educational and entertainment settings: training and serious gaming, interactive information kiosks, tour guides, tutoring, interactive virtual dancers, and much more. Building a complete VH from scratch is a daunting task, and it makes sense to rely on existing platforms. However, when one builds a novel interactive VH application, one needs to be able to adapt and extend the means to control the VH offered by the platform, without reprogramming parts of the platform. This paper describes Elckerlyc, a novel platform for controlling a VH. The focus is on how to easily extend and adapt the system to the needs of a particular application, without programming