Improved Temporal Resolution Heart Rate Variability Monitoring—Pilot Results of Non-Laboratory Experiments Targeting Future Assessment of Human–Computer Interaction

• Autorzy: Hercegfi K.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper outlines the INTERFACE software ergonomic evaluation methodology and presents new validation results. The INTERFACE methodology is based on a simultaneous assessment of heart rate variability, skin conductance, and other data. The results of using this methodology on-site, in a non-laboratory environment indicate that it is potentially capable of identifying quality attributes of elements of software with a temporal resolution of only a few seconds. This paper presents pilot results supporting this hypothesis, showing empirical evidence in spite of the definitely non-laboratory environment: they indicate that the method is robust enough for practical usability tests. Naturally, in the future these pilot results will have to be followed with further laboratory-based verification and refinement. This paper focuses only on some characteristics of this method, not on an actual analysis of human–computer interaction; however, its results can establish a future practical and objective event-related analysis of software use.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

human-computer interaction (HCI); software ergonomics; software usability testing and evaluation; empirical methods; heart rate variability (HRV); skin conductance

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2011
• Tom: Vol. 17, No. 2
• Strony: 105--117
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 36 poz., rys., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Hercegfi K.

• Department of Ergonomics and Psychology, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary

Bibliografia

• 1.International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Software engineering—product quality (Standard No. ISO/IEC 9126:1991). Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 1991.
• 2.Orsila R, Virtanen M, Luukkaala T, Tarvainen M, Karjalainen P, Viik J, et al. Perceived mental stress and reactions in heart rate variability—a pilot study among employees of an electronics company. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2008;14(3):275–83.
• 3.Mulder G, Mulder-Hajonides van der Meulen WREH. Mental load and the measurement of heart rate variability. Ergonomics. 1973;16:69–83.
• 4.Pagani M, Lombardi F, Guzzetti S, Rimoldi O, Furlan R, Pizzinelli P, et al. Power spectral analysis of heart rate and arterial pressure variabilities as a marker of sympathovagal interaction in man and conscious dog. Circ Res. 1986;59:178–93.
• 5.Lang E, Szilagyi N. Significance and assessment of autonomic indices in cardiovascular reactions. Acta Physiol Hung. 1991;78(3):241–60.
• 6.Rowe DW, Sibert J, Irwin D. heart rate variability: indicator of user state as an aid to human-computer interaction. In: Proceedings of CHI98—Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 1998. p. 18–23.
• 7.Mulder G, Mulder LJM, Meijman TF, Veldman JBP, Roon AM. A psychophysiological approach to working conditions. In: Backs RW, Boucsein W, editors. Engineering psychophysiology: issues and applications. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum; 2000. p. 79–110.
• 8.Izso L, Lang E. Heart period variability as mental effort monitor in human computer interaction. Behav Inf Technol. 2000;19(4):297–306.
• 9.Izso L. Developing evaluation methodologies for human-computer interaction. Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University Press; 2001.
• 10.Wilson GF. Psychophysiological test methods and procedures. In: Charlton SG, O’Brien TG, editors. Handbook of human factors testing and evaluation. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum; 2002. p. 127–56.
• 11.Lin T, Imamiya A. Evaluating usability based on multimodal information: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of ICMI’06—the 8th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 2006. p. 364–71.
• 12.Lang E, Szilagyi N, Metneki J, Czeizel E, Adam G. A psychophysiological method for discrimination of MZ and DZ twins: a study based on impedance cardiography. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Congress on Twin Studies, Rome, Italy. 1989.
• 13.Lang E, Caminal P, Horvath G, Jane R, Vallverdu M, Slezsak I, et al. Spectral analysis of heart period variance (HPV)—a tool to stratify risk following myocardial infarction. J Med Eng Technol. 1998;22(6):248–56.
• 14.Silbernagl S, Despopoulos A. Color atlas of physiology. 6th ed. Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme; 2009.
• 15.Akaike H. Fitting autoregressive models for prediction. Ann Inst Statist Math. 1969;21:243–7.
• 16.Kay SM, Marple SL. Spectrum analysis—a modern perspective. Proceedings of the IEEE. 1981;69(11):1380–419.
• 17.Gray AH, Wong DY. The Burg algorithm for LPC speech analysis synthesis. IEEE Trans Acoust Speech Signal Process. 1980;28(6):609–15.
• 18.Andreassi JL. Psychophysiology human behavior and psychological response. 4th ed. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum; 2000.
• 19.Luu Ph, Frank R, Kerick S, Tucker DM. Directed components analysis: an analytic method for the removal of biophysical artifacts from EEG data. In: Schmorrow DD, Estabrooke IV, Grootjen M, editors. Augmented cognition, HCII 2009 (LNAI 5638). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 411–6.
• 20.Brouwer A-M, Hogervorst MA, Herman P, Kooi F. Are you really looking? Finding the answer through fixation patterns and EEG. In: Schmorrow DD, Estabrooke IV, Grootjen M, editors. Augmented cognition, HCII 2009 (LNAI 5638). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 329–38.
• 21.Lee H, Lee J, Seo S. Brain response to good and bad design. In: Jacko JA, editor. Human–Computer Interaction, Part 1, HCII 2009 (LNCS 5610). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 111–20.
• 22.Huang R-S, Jung T-P, Makeing S. Tonic changes in EEG power spectra during simulated driving. In: In: Schmorrow DD, Estabrooke IV, Grootjen M, editors. Augmented cognition, HCII 2009 (LNAI 5638). Berlin, Germany: Springer; Proceedings; p. 394–403.
• 23.Srinivasan R, Thorpe S, Deng S, Lappas T, D’Zamura M. Decoding attentional orientation from EEG spectra. In: Jacko JA, editor. Human–Computer Interaction, Part 1, HCII 2009 (LNCS 5610). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 176–83.
• 24.Mandryk RL, Atkins MS, Inkpen KM. A continuous and objective evaluation of emotional experience with interactive play environments. In: Proceedings of CHI2006—Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 2006. p. 1027–36.
• 25.Park B. Psychophysiology as a tool for HCI research: promises and pitfalls. In: Jacko JA, editor. Human–Computer Interaction, Part 1, HCII 2009 (LNCS 5610). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 141–8.
• 26.Obinata G, Tokuda S, Fukuda K, Hamada H. Quantitative evaluation of mental workload by using model of involuntary eye movement. In: Harris D, editor. Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, HCII 2009 (LNAI 5639). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 223–32.
• 27.Oliveira FTP, Aula A, Russel DM. Discriminating the relevance of web search results with measures of pupil size. In: Proceedings of CHI2009—Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press. 2009. p. 2209–12.
• 28.Tullis T, Albert B. Measuring the user experience. Collecting, analyzing, and presenting usability metrics. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2008.
• 29.Komlodi A, Hercegfi K. Cultural differences in information behavior. In: Proceedings of HCIR 2009: 3rd Workshop on Human-Computer Interaction and Information Retrieval. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 2009; p. 78–81.
• 30.Komlodi A, Hercegfi K. Exploring cultural differences in information behavior applying psychophysiological methods. In: Proceedings of CHI2010—Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 2010. p. 4153–8.
• 31.Izso L, Hercegfi K. HCI Group of the Department of Ergonomics and Psychology at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. In: Extended Abstracts of CHI2004—Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 2004. p. 1077–8.
• 32.Hercegfi K, Kiss OE, Bali K, Izso L. INTERFACE: assessment of human–computer interaction by monitoring physiological and other data with a timeresolution of only a few seconds. In: Ljungberg J, Andersson M, editors. ECIS 2006: 14th European Conference on Information Systems. 2006. p. 2288–99.
• 33.Hercegfi K, Kiss OE. Assessment of e-learning material with the INTERFACE system. In: Bernath U, Szucs A, Tait A, Vidal M, editors. Distance and e-learning in transition. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley; 2009. p. 645–57.
• 34.Hercegfi K, Paszti M, Tovolgyi S, Izso L. Usability evaluation by monitoring physiological and other data simultaneously with a time-resolution of only a few seconds. In: Jacko JA, editor. Human–Computer Interaction, Part 1, HCII 2009 (LNCS 5610). Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2009. p. 59–68.
• 35.Laufer L, Nemeth B. Predicting user action from skin conductance. In: Proceedings of IUI 2008—13th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press; 2008. p. 357–60.
• 36.Izso L. Discrimination between design errors and user errors by binomial test. Behav Inf Technol. 2000;19(5):379–84.