↓ Skip to main content

Deployment of Mobile EEG Technology in an Art Museum Setting: Evaluation of Signal Quality and Usability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Deployment of Mobile EEG Technology in an Art Museum Setting: Evaluation of Signal Quality and Usability
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00527
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jesus G. Cruz-Garza, Justin A. Brantley, Sho Nakagome, Kimberly Kontson, Murad Megjhani, Dario Robleto, Jose L. Contreras-Vidal

Abstract

Electroencephalography (EEG) has emerged as a powerful tool for quantitatively studying the brain that enables natural and mobile experiments. Recent advances in EEG have allowed for the use of dry electrodes that do not require a conductive medium between the recording electrode and the scalp. The overall goal of this research was to gain an understanding of the overall usability and signal quality of dry EEG headsets compared to traditional gel-based systems in an unconstrained environment. EEG was used to collect Mobile Brain-body Imaging (MoBI) data from 432 people as they experienced an art exhibit in a public museum. The subjects were instrumented with either one of four dry electrode EEG systems or a conventional gel electrode EEG system. Each of the systems was evaluated based on the signal quality and usability in a real-world setting. First, we describe the various artifacts that were characteristic of each of the systems. Second, we report on each system's usability and their limitations in a mobile setting. Third, to evaluate signal quality for task discrimination and characterization, we employed a data driven clustering approach on the data from 134 of the 432 subjects (those with reliable location tracking information and usable EEG data) to evaluate the power spectral density (PSD) content of the EEG recordings. The experiment consisted of a baseline condition in which the subjects sat quietly facing a white wall for 1 min. Subsequently, the participants were encouraged to explore the exhibit for as long as they wished (piece-viewing). No constraints were placed upon the individual in relation to action, time, or navigation of the exhibit. In this freely-behaving approach, the EEG systems varied in their capacity to record characteristic modulations in the EEG data, with the gel-based system more clearly capturing stereotypical alpha and beta-band modulations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 14%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 35 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 17 14%
Neuroscience 15 12%
Psychology 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 45 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,245,531
of 23,202,641 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,111
of 7,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,924
of 328,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#29
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,202,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,572 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.