Realistic expectations with brain computer interfaces

What is it like to use a BCI? - insights from an interview study with brain-computer interface users

Background

The neurotechnology behind brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) raises various ethical questions. The ethical literature has pinpointed several issues concerning safety, autonomy, responsibility and accountability, psychosocial identity, consent, privacy and data security. This study aims to assess BCI users’ experiences, self-observations and attitudes in their own right and looks for social and ethical implications.

Methods

We conducted nine semi-structured interviews with BCI users, who used the technology for medical reasons. The transcribed interviews were analyzed according to the Grounded Theory coding method.

Results

BCI users perceive themselves as active operators of a technology that offers them social participation and impacts their self-definition. Each of these aspects bears its own opportunities and risks. BCIs can contribute to retaining or regaining human capabilities. At the same time, BCI use contains elements that challenge common experiences, for example when the technology is in conflict with the affective side of BCI users. The potential benefits of BCIs are regarded as outweighing the risks in that BCI use is considered to promote valuable qualities and capabilities. BCI users appreciate the opportunity to regain lost capabilities as well as to gain new ones.

Conclusions

BCI users appreciate the technology for various reasons. The technology is highly appreciated in cases where it is beneficial in terms of agency, participation and self-definitions. Rather than questioning human nature, the technology can retain and restore characteristics and abilities which enrich our lives.

The effects of visual distractors on cognitive load in a motor imagery brain-computer interface

A brain-computer interface (BCI) is a system that translates neural activity into a practical output. Its functionality, therefore, depends not only on the computer itself, but also on the cognitive system of the user. Distractors have the potential to capture attention, increase cognitive load, and may therefore impact BCI use. The purpose of the current study is to determine the effects of small visual distractors on the cognitive load of users of a motor imagery-BCI, and to examine whether these distractor-mediated effects can be improved by modifying the task interface. Sixteen typically-developed participants completed two sessions of online motor imagery to control an EEG-BCI, under conditions of no distractors, visual distractors, and cognitive strategies (intended to mitigate cognitive load) amid distractors. Cognitive load for each session was assessed through both a ratio of theta to alpha power and the NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Task-irrelevant visual stimuli were found to significantly increase the objective measure of cognitive load, particularly for parietal channels. Subjective cognitive load as indexed by the NASA-TLX was predictive of a decrease in BCI performance for participants with below 0.75 classification accuracy (R² = 0.32, p < 0.001), which may indicate a differential susceptibility to changes in workload for "low"-performing participants. Quantifying and addressing the increased cognitive load imparted by distractors on BCI users can aid in the future applicability of the technology in real-world settings.

Using brain-computer interfaces: a scoping review of studies employing social research methods

Background

The rapid expansion of research on Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) is not only due to the promising solutions offered for persons with physical impairments. There is also a heightened need for understanding BCIs due to the challenges regarding ethics presented by new technology, especially in its impact on the relationship between man and machine. Here we endeavor to present a scoping review of current studies in the field to gain insight into the complexity of BCI use. By examining studies related to BCIs that employ social research methods, we seek to demonstrate the multitude of approaches and concerns from various angles in considering the social and human impact of BCI technology.

Methods

For this scoping review of research on BCIs’ social and ethical implications, we systematically analyzed six databases, encompassing the fields of medicine, psychology, and the social sciences, in order to identify empirical studies on BCIs. The search yielded 73 publications that employ quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods.

Results

Of the 73 publications, 71 studies address the user perspective. Some studies extend to consideration of other BCI stakeholders such as medical technology experts, caregivers, or health care professionals. The majority of the studies employ quantitative methods. Recurring themes across the studies examined were general user opinion towards BCI, central technical or social issues reported, requests/demands made by users of the technology, the potential/future of BCIs, and ethical aspects of BCIs.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that while technical aspects of BCIs such as usability or feasibility are being studied extensively, comparatively little in-depth research has been done on the self-image and self-experience of the BCI user. In general there is also a lack of focus or examination of the caregiver’s perspective.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-019-0354-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.