In this article, we propose using personality assessment as a way to adapt affective intelligent systems. This psychologically-grounded mechanism will divide users into groups that differ in their reactions to affective stimuli for which the behaviour of the system can be adjusted. In order to verify the hypotheses, we conducted an experiment on 206 people, which consisted of two proof-of-concept demonstrations: a “classical” stimuli presentation part, and affective games that provide a rich and controllable environment for complex emotional stimuli. Several significant links between personality traits and the psychophysiological signals (electrocardiogram (ECG), galvanic skin response (GSR)), which were gathered while using the BITalino (r)evolution kit platform, as well as between personality traits and reactions to complex stimulus environment, are promising results that indicate the potential of the proposed adaptation mechanism.
Expected surprise, defined as the anticipation of uncertainty associated with the occurrence of a future event, plays a major role in gaze shifting and spatial attention. In the present study, we analyzed its impact on oculomotor behavior. We hypothesized that the occurrence of anticipatory saccades could decrease with increasing expected surprise and that its influence on visually-guided responses could be different given the presence of sensory information and perhaps competitive attentional effects. This hypothesis was tested in humans using a saccadic reaction time task in which a cue indicated the future stimulus position. In the ‘no expected surprise’ condition, the visual target could appear only at one previously cued location. In other conditions, more likely future positions were cued with increasing expected surprise. Anticipation was more frequent and pupil size was larger in the ‘no expected surprise’ condition compared with all other conditions, probably due to increased arousal. The latency of visually-guided saccades increased linearly with the logarithm of surprise (following Hick’s law) but their maximum velocity repeated the arousal-related pattern. Therefore, expected surprise affects anticipatory and visually-guided responses differently. Moreover, these observations suggest a causal chain linking surprise, attention and saccades that could be disrupted in attentional or impulse control disorders.
Expected surprise could be defined as the anticipation of the uncertainty associated with the future occurrence of a target of interest. We hypothesized that spatial expected surprise could have a different impact on anticipatory and visual gaze orientation. This hypothesis was tested in humans using a saccadic reaction time task in which a cue indicated the future position of a stimulus. In the ‘no expected surprise’ condition, the visual target could appear only at the previously cued location. In other conditions, more likely future positions were cued with increasing expected surprise. Anticipation was more frequent and pupil size was larger in the no expected surprise condition compared with all other conditions. The latency of visually-guided saccades increased linearly with the logarithm of surprise but their maximum velocity did not.In conclusion, before stimulus appearance oculomotor responses were altered probably due to increased arousal in the no expected surprise condition. After stimulus appearance, the saccadic decision signal could be scaled logarithmically as a function of surprise (Hick’s law). However, maximum velocity also reflected increased arousal in the no surprise condition. Therefore, expected surprise alters the balance between anticipatory and visually-guided responses and differently affects movement kinematics and latency.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.