Literature DB >> 34045844

Efficacy of personalized models in discriminating high cognitive demand conditions using text-based interactions.

Lisa M Vizer1, Andrew Sears1.   

Abstract

Although high cognitive demand conditions can impair psychological, physical, and behavioral processes without appropriate management, current measurement methods are too cumbersome for continuous monitoring of cognitive demand, and do not account for individual differences. This research uses keystroke and linguistic markers of typed text to construct individualized models of cognitive demand response to discriminate high and low cognitive demand conditions, the results of which can have implications for design of cognitive demand monitoring systems for personalized health management. We constructed within-subject models of cognitive demand response for nine participants and one between-subjects model based on 20 participants. The AUCs for personalized models ranged from 0.679 to 0.953 (Mean=0.826, SD=0.085), significantly higher than chance (p < 0.0001) and the 0.714 AUC for the generic model (p=0.002). Although the features in each model were different, the most common features across models are rate of negative emotion, lexical diversity, rate of words over six letters, and word count. These results confirm significant individual differences in cognitive demand response and suggest that those developing measurement methods used in a monitoring system should consider adaptation to individual characteristics. Our research operationalizes the effects of cognitive demand on HCI and contributes a unique combination of text and keystroke features used to detect high cognitive demand situations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive demand; Cognitive load; Cognitive stress; Consumer health informatics; Health monitoring; Human-centered computing

Year:  2017        PMID: 34045844      PMCID: PMC8153188          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.03.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Hum Comput Stud        ISSN: 1071-5819            Impact factor:   3.632


  13 in total

Review 1.  Cues to deception.

Authors:  Bella M DePaulo; James J Lindsay; Brian E Malone; Laura Muhlenbruck; Kelly Charlton; Harris Cooper
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Fundamental dimensions of subjective state in performance settings: task engagement, distress, and worry.

Authors:  Gerald Matthews; Sian E Campbell; Shona Falconer; Lucy A Joyner; Jane Huggins; Kirby Gilliland; Rebecca Grier; Joel S Warm
Journal:  Emotion       Date:  2002-12

3.  Sensitivity of physiological measures for detecting systematic variations in cognitive demand from a working memory task: an on-road study across three age groups.

Authors:  Bruce Mehler; Bryan Reimer; Joseph F Coughlin
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.888

4.  N-back working memory paradigm: a meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies.

Authors:  Adrian M Owen; Kathryn M McMillan; Angela R Laird; Ed Bullmore
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Measuring occupational stress: development of the pressure management indicator.

Authors:  S Williams; C L Cooper
Journal:  J Occup Health Psychol       Date:  1998-10

6.  Non-immediacy between communicator and object of communication in a verbal message: application to the inference of attitudes.

Authors:  A Mehrabian; M Wiener
Journal:  J Consult Psychol       Date:  1966-10

7.  Reactivity to daily stressors in adulthood: the importance of stressor type in characterizing risk factors.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Hay; Manfred Diehl
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2010-03

8.  The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics.

Authors:  R Karasek; C Brisson; N Kawakami; I Houtman; P Bongers; B Amick
Journal:  J Occup Health Psychol       Date:  1998-10

Review 9.  Working memory and language: an overview.

Authors:  Alan Baddeley
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.288

Review 10.  The effects of stress and stress hormones on human cognition: Implications for the field of brain and cognition.

Authors:  S J Lupien; F Maheu; M Tu; A Fiocco; T E Schramek
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2007-04-26       Impact factor: 2.310

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.