ArticleFrontiers in neuroergonomics2025
Towards neuroadaptive chatbots: a feasibility study.
Article in Frontiers in neuroergonomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Large-language models (LLMs) are transforming most industries today and are set to become a cornerstone of the human digital experience. While integrating explicit human feedback into the training and development of LLM-based chatbots has been integral to the progress we see nowadays, more work is needed to understand how to best align them with human values. Implicit human feedback enabled by passive brain-computer interfaces (pBCIs) could potentially help unlock the hidden nuance of users' cognitive and affective states during interaction with chatbots. This study proposes an investigation on the feasibility of using pBCIs to decode mental states in reaction to text stimuli, to lay the groundwork for neuroadaptive chatbots. Methods: Two paradigms were created to elicit moral judgment and error-processing with text stimuli. Electroencephalography (EEG) data was recorded with 64 gel electrodes while participants completed reading tasks. Mental state classifiers were obtained in an offline manner with a windowed-means approach and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) for full-component and brain-component data. The corresponding event-related potentials (ERPs) were visually inspected. Results: Moral salience was successfully decoded at a single-trial level, with an average calibration accuracy of 78% on the basis of a data window of 600 ms. Subsequent classifiers were not able to distinguish moral judgment congruence (i.e., moral agreement) and incongruence (i.e., moral disagreement). Error processing in reaction to factual inaccuracy was decoded with an average calibration accuracy of 66%. The identified ERPs for the investigated mental states partly aligned with other findings. Discussion: With this study, we demonstrate the feasibility of using pBCIs to distinguish mental states from readers' brain data at a single-trial level. More work is needed to transition from offline to online investigations and to understand if reliable pBCI classifiers can also be obtained in less controlled language tasks and more realistic chatbot interactions. Our work marks preliminary steps for understanding and making use of neural-based implicit human feedback for LLM alignment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.