skip to main content
10.1145/3267305.3274113acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

My Watch Says I'm Busy: Inferring Cognitive Load with Low-Cost Wearables

Authors Info & Claims
Published:08 October 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

To prevent undesirable effects of attention grabbing at times when a user is occupied with a difficult task, ubiquitous computing devices should be aware of the user's cognitive load. However, inferring cognitive load is extremely challenging, especially when performed without obtrusive, expensive, and purpose-built equipment. In this study we examine the potential for inferring one's cognitive load using merely cheap wearable sensing devices. We subject 25 volunteers to varying cognitive load using six different Primary tasks. In parallel, we collect physiological data with a cheap device, extract features, and then construct machine learning models for cognitive load prediction. As metrics for the load we use one subjective measure, the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), and two objective measures: task difficulty and reaction time. The leave-one-subject-out evaluation shows a significant influence of the task type and the chosen cognitive load metric on the prediction accuracy.

References

  1. M.C. Ashton, K. Lee, M Perugini, P Szarota, R.E. de Vries, L Di Blas, K Boies, and B. De Raad. 2004. A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86, 2 (2004), 356--366. ArticleGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Jelmer P. Borst, Niels A. Taatgen, and Hedderik van Rijn. 2010. The Problem State: A Cognitive Bottleneck in Multitasking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36, 2 (2010), 363--382.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Jelmer P. Borst, Niels A. Taatgen, and Hedderik van Rijn. 2015. What Makes Interruptions Disruptive?: A Process-Model Account of the Effects of the Problem State Bottleneck on Task Interruption and Resumption. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2971--2980. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Krista E DeLeeuw and Richard E Mayer. 2008. A Comparison of Three Measures of Cognitive Load: Evidence for Separable Measures of Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology 100, 1 (2008), 223--234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Eija Haapalainen, SeungJun Kim, Jodi F. Forlizzi, and Anind K. Dey. 2010. Psycho-physiological Measures for Assessing Cognitive Load. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 301--310. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. Advances in Psychology 52 (1988), 139--183.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. G. Jakus K. Novak, K. Stojmenova and J. Sodnik. 2017. Assessment of cognitive load through biometric monitoring. Society for Information Systems and Computer Networks, Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Fred Paas, Juhani E Tuovinen, Huib Tabbers, and Pascal WM Van Gerven. 2003. Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational psychologist 38, 1 (February 2003), 63--71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Rahul Rajan, Ted Selker, and Ian Lane. 2016. Task Load Estimation and Mediation Using Psycho-physiological Measures. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 48--59. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Dario D. Salvucci and Niels A. Taatgen. 2008. Threaded cognition: An integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. Psychological Review 115, 1 (January 2008), 101--130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Florian Schaule, Jan Ole Johanssen, Bernd Bruegge, and Vivian Loftness. 2018. Employing Consumer Wearables to Detect Office Workers' Cognitive Load for Interruption Management. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 2, 1, Article 32 (March 2018), 20 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Florian Schmiedek, Martin Lövdén, and Ulman Lindenberger. 2014. A task is a task is a task: putting complex span, n-back, and other working memory indicators in psychometric context. Frontiers in psychology 5 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Gašper Urh and Veljko Pejovic. 2016. TaskyApp: Inferring Task Engagement via Smartphone Sensing. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct (UbiComp '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1548--1553. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Manuela Züger and Thomas Fritz. 2015. Interruptibility of Software Developers and Its Prediction Using Psycho-Physiological Sensors. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2981--2990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. My Watch Says I'm Busy: Inferring Cognitive Load with Low-Cost Wearables

    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 Conferences
      UbiComp '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Joint Conference and 2018 International Symposium on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Wearable Computers
      October 2018
      1881 pages
      ISBN:9781450359665
      DOI:10.1145/3267305

      Copyright © 2018 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: 8 October 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate764of2,912submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader