Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36518531›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022

Reliability of MUSE 2 and Tobii Pro Nano at capturing mobile application users' real-time cognitive workload changes.

Limin Zhang, Hong Cui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Limin ZhangChina School of Fine Arts, Huaiyin Normal University, Huaian, China.
Hong CuiUSA School of Information, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Despite the importance of cognitive workload in examining the usability of smartphone applications and the popularity of smartphone usage globally, cognitive workload as one attribute of usability tends to be overlooked in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) studies. Moreover, limited studies that have examined the cognitive workload aspect often measured some summative workloads using subjective measures (e.g., questionnaires). A significant limitation of subjective measures is that they can only assess the overall, subject-perceived cognitive workload after the procedures/tasks have been completed. Such measurements do not reflect the real-time workload fluctuation during the procedures. The reliability of some devices on a smartphone setting has not been thoroughly evaluated. Methods: This study used mixed methods to empirically study the reliability of an eye-tracking device (i.e., Tobii Pro Nano) and a low-cost electroencephalogram (EEG) device (i.e., MUSE 2) for detecting real-time cognitive workload changes during N-back tasks. Results: Results suggest that the EEG measurements collected by MUSE 2 are not very useful as indicators of cognitive workload changes in our setting, eye movement measurements collected by Tobii Pro Nano with mobile testing accessory are useful for monitoring cognitive workload fluctuations and tracking down interface design issues in a smartphone setting, and more specifically, the maximum pupil diameter is the preeminent indicator of cognitive workload surges. Discussion: In conclusion, the pupil diameter measure combined with other subjective ratings would provide a comprehensive user experience assessment of mobile applications. They can also be used to verify the successfulness of a user interface design solution in improving user experience.

Indexed as

cognitive workloadEEGeye movementeye trackingGUI

Identifiers

PMID36518531
PMCPMC9743809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.