skip to main content
10.1145/2838944.2838977acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesrehabConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Show me your eyes! The combined use of eye tracking and virtual reality applications for cognitive assessment

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 October 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Attention and working memory are essential aspects of human cognitive abilities. When these capacities are impaired, virtual reality applications (VRAs) can be a tool to assess and rehabilitate. However, most VRAs use indirect manual reaction time measures to make inferences about visual attention processes. Since behavioral measures are quite indirect, eye tracking (ET) can offer a better alternative to probe more directly where and how attention is deployed. We propose two tasks with different levels of perceptual complexity for assessing visual attention and performance. Two comparative visual search tasks, as part of a set of cognitive tasks in the Systemic Lisbon Battery (SLB), a VRA designed to assess of cognitive impairments, were randomly presented to 39 healthy participants while the eye movements were continuously recorded. The total fixation duration, the number of visits in the areas of interest, along with the total execution time changed as a function of the overall score of cognitive ability. The present study demonstrates that the "spot the differences" tasks in SLB, combined with ET, are a reliable, sensitive and unobtrusive method to assess cognitive abilities in healthy individuals with a relevant potential use in clinical samples.

References

  1. Negut, A. 2014. Cognitive assessment and rehabilitation in virtual reality: Theoretical review and practical implications. Rom J Appl Psychol 16 (June 30), 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alankus, G., Lazar, A., May, M. and Kelleher, C. 2010. Towards customizable games for stroke rehabilitation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. (Atlanta, USA, April 10--15, 2010) ACM Press, New York, NY, 2113--2122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Rego, P., Moreira, P. M. and Reis, L. P. 2010. Serious games for rehabilitation: A survey and a classification towards a taxonomy. In Proceeding of the 5th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI) (Santiago de Compostela, Spain, June 16--19, 2010). IEEE press, NY, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Parsey, C. and Schmitter-Edgecombe, M. 2013. Applications of Technology in Neuropsychological Assessment. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27(Nov. 1), 10. DOI=: 10.1080/13854046.2013.834971Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ortiz-Catalan, M., Nijenhuis, S., Ambrosch, K., Bovend'Eerdt, T., Koenig, S. and Lange, B. 2014. Virtual Reality. In Emerging Therapies in Neurorehabilitation, Biosystems & Biorobotics, L. Pons and D. Torricelli, Eds. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 249--265. DOI= 10.1007/978-3-642-38556-8_13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Gamito, P., Oliveira, J., Caires, C., Morais, D., Brito, R., Lopes, P., Saraiva, T., Soares, F., Sottomayor, C., Barata, F., Picareli, F., Prates, M. and Santos, C. 2015. Virtual Kitchen Test. Assessing frontal lobe functions in patients with alcohol dependence syndrome. Methods Inf Med 54, 2, 122--126. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.3414/ME14-01-0003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Lam, Y. S., Man, D. W., Tam, S. F. and Weiss, P. L. 2006. Virtual reality training for stroke rehabilitation. NeuroRehabilitation 21, 3, 245--253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Rosa, P. J., Gamito, P. Oliveira, J. and Morais, D. 2011. Attentional orienting to biologically fear-relevant stimuli: data from eye tracking using the continual alternation flicker paradigm, Journal of Eye Tracking, Emotion and Cognition 1, 22--29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Gamito, P., Oliveira, J., Baptista, A., Morais, D., Lopes, P., Rosa, P., Santos, N. and Brito, R. 2014. Eliciting nicotine craving with virtual smoking cues. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 17, 8 (Aug), 556--561. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0329.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Cipresso, P., Serino, S., Gaggioli, A., Albani, G. and Riva, G. 2013. Contactless bio-behavioral technologies for virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inform 191, 149--153.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Rosa, P. J., Esteves, F. and Arriaga, P. 2014. Effects of fear-relevant stimuli on attention: integrating gaze data with subliminal exposure, In Proceedings of the Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) (Lisbon, Portugal, June 12--14), 8--14. DOI=10.1109/MeMeA.2014.6860021Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Tatler, B. W., Kirtley, C., Macdonald, R. G., Mitchell, K. M. A. and Savage, S. W. 2014. The Active Eye: Perspectives on Eye Movement Research. In Current Trends in Eye Tracking Research, M. Horsley, M. Eliot, B.A. Knight and R. Reilly Eds. Springer, 3--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Rosa, P. J., Esteves, F. and Arriaga P. In press. Beyond traditional clinical measurements for screening fears and phobias. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation & Measurement. DOI=10.1109/TIM.2015.2450292.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Mele, M. and Federici, S. 2012. A psychotechnological review on eye-tracking systems: towards user experience. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 7, 4 (Jul), 261--281. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2011.635326.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Vidal, M., Turner, J., Bulling, A. and Gellersen, H. 2012. Wearable eye tracking for mental health monitoring. Computer Communications 35, 11 (June 15), 1306--1311. DOI=dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2011.11.002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Frutos-Pascual, M. and Garcia-Zapirain, B. 2015. Assessing Visual Attention Using Eye Tracking Sensors in Intelligent Cognitive Therapies Based on Serious Games. Sensors 15, 5, 11092. DOI=10.3390/s150511092Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Galpin, A. J. and Underwood, G. 2005. Eye movements during search and detection in comparative visual search. Percept Psychophys 67, 8 (Nov), 1313--1331.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Irwin, D. E. and Zelinsky, G. J. 2002. Eye movements and scene perception: memory for things observed. Percept Psychophys 64, 6 (Aug), 882--895.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Pomplun, M., Sichelschmidt, L., Wagner, K., Clermont, T., Rickheit, G. and Ritter, H., 2001. Comparative visual search: a difference that makes a difference. Cognitive Science 25, 1, 3--36. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2501_2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Folstein, M., Folstein, S. and McHugh, P. 1975. Mini-Mental State a Practical Method for Grading the Cognitive State of Patients for the Clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12, 3, 189--198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Marin M. and Leder, H. 2013. Examining Complexity across Domains: Relating Subjective and Objective Measures of Affective Environmental Scenes, Paintings and Music. PLoSONE 8 8, e72412. DOI=10.1371/journal.pone.0072412Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Gottlob, L. R. 2006. Aging and Comparative Search for Feature Differences. Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition 13, 3--4 (December), 435--457. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/138255890969564.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Mcafoose, J. and Baune, B. T. 2009. Exploring visual-spatial working memory: a critical review of concepts and models. Neuropsychol Rev 19, 1 (Mar), 130--142. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11065-008-9063-0.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Rosa, P. J. 2015. What do your eyes say? Bridging eye movements to consumer behavior. International Journal of Psychological Research 8, 2 (June), 91--104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  1. Show me your eyes! The combined use of eye tracking and virtual reality applications for cognitive assessment

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      REHAB '15: Proceedings of the 3rd 2015 Workshop on ICTs for improving Patients Rehabilitation Research Techniques
      October 2015
      176 pages
      ISBN:9781450338981
      DOI:10.1145/2838944

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 October 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader