↓ Skip to main content

Combining and comparing EEG, peripheral physiology and eye-related measures for the assessment of mental workload

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
201 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
362 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
Combining and comparing EEG, peripheral physiology and eye-related measures for the assessment of mental workload
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00322
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maarten A. Hogervorst, Anne-Marie Brouwer, Jan B. F. van Erp

Abstract

While studies exist that compare different physiological variables with respect to their association with mental workload, it is still largely unclear which variables supply the best information about momentary workload of an individual and what is the benefit of combining them. We investigated workload using the n-back task, controlling for body movements and visual input. We recorded EEG, skin conductance, respiration, ECG, pupil size and eye blinks of 14 subjects. Various variables were extracted from these recordings and used as features in individually tuned classification models. Online classification was simulated by using the first part of the data as training set and the last part of the data for testing the models. The results indicate that EEG performs best, followed by eye related measures and peripheral physiology. Combining variables from different sensors did not significantly improve workload assessment over the best performing sensor alone. Best classification accuracy, a little over 90%, was reached for distinguishing between high and low workload on the basis of 2 min segments of EEG and eye related variables. A similar and not significantly different performance of 86% was reached using only EEG from single electrode location Pz.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 362 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
France 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 350 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 107 30%
Student > Master 51 14%
Researcher 37 10%
Student > Bachelor 23 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 6%
Other 47 13%
Unknown 76 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 79 22%
Psychology 78 22%
Computer Science 36 10%
Neuroscience 30 8%
Social Sciences 10 3%
Other 40 11%
Unknown 89 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,388,865
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,640
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,600
of 268,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#62
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 268,217 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.