No abstract

No abstract

Recently research into Brain-Computer Interfacing (BCI) applications for healthy users, such as games, has been initiated. But why would a healthy person use a still-unproven technology such as BCI for game interaction? BCI provides a combination of information and features that no other input modality can offer. But for general acceptance of this technology, usability and user experience will need to be taken into account when designing such systems. Therefore, this chapter gives an overview of the state of the art of BCI in games and discusses the consequences of applying knowledge from Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to the design of BCI for games. The integration of HCI with BCI is illustrated by research examples and showcases, intended to take this promising technology out of the lab. Future

Abstract-Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) come with a lot of issues, such as delays, bad recognition, long training times, and cumbersome hardware. Gamers are a large potential target group for this new interaction modality, but why would healthy subjects want to use it? BCI provides a combination of information and features that no other input modality can offer. But for general acceptance of this technology, usability and user experience will need to be taken into account when designing such systems. This paper discusses the consequences of applying knowledge from Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to the design of BCI for games. The integration of HCI with BCI is illustrated by research examples and showcases, intended to take this promising technology out of the lab. Future research needs to move beyond feasibility tests, to prove that BCI is also applicable in realistic, real-world settings.

Abstract. Does using a brain-computer interface (BCI) influence the social interaction between people when playing a cooperative game? By measuring the amount of speech, utterances, instrumental gestures and empathic gestures during a cooperative game where two participants had to reach a certain goal, and questioning participants about their own experience afterwards this study attempts to provide answers to this question. The results showed that social interaction changed when using a BCI compared to using a mouse. There was a higher amount of utterances and empathic gestures. This indicates that the participants reacted more to the higher difficulty of the BCI selection method. Participants also reported that they felt they cooperated better during the use of the mouse.

No abstract

The multimodal, multi-paradigm brain-computer interfacing (BCI) game Bacteria Hunt was used to evaluate two aspects of BCI interaction in a gaming context. One goal was to examine the effect of feedback on the ability of the user to manipulate his mental state of relaxation. This was done by having one condition in which the subject played the game with real feedback, and another with sham feedback. The feedback did not seem to affect the game experience (such as sense of control and tension) or the objective indicators of relaxation, alpha activity and heart rate. The results are discussed with regard to clinical neurofeedback studies. The second goal was to look into possible interactions between the two BCI paradigms used in the game: steady-state visually-evoked potentials (SSVEP) as an indicator of concentration, and alpha activity as a measure of relaxation. SSVEP stimulation activates the cortex and can thus block the alpha rhythm. Despite this effect, subjects were able to keep their alpha power up, in compliance with the instructed relaxation task. In addition to the main goals, a new SSVEP detection algorithm was developed and evaluated.

No abstract