Cited by 307EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Flaws in current human training protocols for spontaneous Brain-Computer Interfaces: lessons learned from instructional design

Open access
Lotte, Fabien, Larrue, Florian, Mühl, Christian·2013·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Abstract

While recent research on Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) has highlighted their potential for many applications, they remain barely used outside laboratories. The main reason is their lack of robustness. Indeed, with current BCI, mental state recognition is usually slow and often incorrect. Spontaneous BCI (i.e., mental imagery-based BCI) often rely on mutual learning efforts by the user and the machine, with BCI users learning to produce stable ElectroEncephaloGraphy (EEG) patterns (spontaneous BCI control being widely acknowledged as a skill) while the computer learns to automatically recognize these EEG patterns, using signal processing. Most research so far was focused on signal processing, mostly neglecting the human in the loop. However, how well the user masters the BCI skill is also a key element explaining BCI robustness. Indeed, if the user is not able to produce stable and distinct EEG patterns, then no signal processing algorithm would be able to recognize them. Unfortunately, despite the importance of BCI training protocols, they have been scarcely studied so far, and used mostly unchanged for years. In this paper, we advocate that current human training approaches for spontaneous BCI are most likely inappropriate. We notably study instructional design literature in order to identify the key requirements and guidelines for a successful training procedure that promotes a good and efficient skill learning. This literature study highlights that current spontaneous BCI user training procedures satisfy very few of these requirements and hence are likely to be suboptimal. We therefore identify the flaws in BCI training protocols according to instructional design principles, at several levels: in the instructions provided to the user, in the tasks he/she has to perform, and in the feedback provided. For each level, we propose new research directions that are theoretically expected to address some of these flaws and to help users learn the BCI skill more efficiently.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00568

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The authors' results are in line with the emerging belief about the need for more stimulating BCI training contexts.

    “Our results are in line with the emerging belief about the need for more stimulating BCI training contexts [47,53,66].”
  • Various psychological factors, such as motivation, attention, and stress, have been implicated in these negative effects, which are quite frequent in MI BCI operation.

    “Various psychological factors (such as motivation, attention, and stress) have been implicated in these negative effects [2,47,53,66–68], which unfortunately are quite frequent in MI BCI operation.”
  • Another contributing factor to successful SMR enhancement might have been the implementation of an "incremental learning" approach where open-loop, closed-loop, and application training followed each other throughout training.

    “Related to this, another contributing factor to successful SMR enhancement might have been that we have implemented an “incremental learning” approach as advocated in [53] and shown in [69], where open-loop, closed-loop, and application training (tasks of increasing difficulty) followed each other throughout training.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Fazli S. Grozea C. Danóczy M. Blankertz B. Popescu F. Müller K.-R. (2009). Subject independent EEG-based BCI decoding, in NIPS (Vancouver, BC), 513– 521
  2. Kleih S. C. Riccio A. Mattia D. Kaiser V. Friedrich E. V. C. Kübler A. (2011). Motivation influences performance in SMR-BCI,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Brain-Computer Interface Conference 2011 (Graz, Austria: Verlag der Technischen Universität), 108– 115
  3. Larrue F. Sauzeon H. Aguilova L. Lotte F. Hachet M. Nkaoua B. (2012). Brain computer interface Vs walking interface in VR: the impact of motor activity on spatial transfer,” in Virtual Reality Software and Technologies (VRST 2012) (Toronto, Canada), 113– 120 10.1145/2407336.2407359 · DOI
  4. Lotte F. (2012). A new feature and associated optimal spatial filter for EEG signal classification: waveform length, in International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) (Tsukuba, Japan), 1302– 1305
  5. Lotte F. Faller J. Guger C. Renard Y. Pfurtscheller G. Lécuyer A. (2013). Combining BCI with virtual reality: towards new applications and improved BCI,” in Towards Practical Brain-Computer Interfaces, Biological and Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, eds Allison B. Z. Dunne S. Leeb R. Del R. Millán J. Nijholt A. (Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer), 197– 220
  6. McFarland D. McCane L. Wolpaw J. (1998). EEG-based communication and control: short-term role of feedback. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 6, 7– 11 10.1109/86.662615 9535518 · DOI
  7. Plass-Oude Bos D. Reuderink B. Laar B. Gürkök H. Mühl C. Poel M. (2010). Brain-computer interfacing and games,” in Brain-Computer Interfaces: Applying Our Minds to Human-Computer Interaction, chapter 10, eds Tan D. S. Nijholt A. (London: Springer), 149– 178
  8. Reeves B. Nass C. (1996). The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
  9. Tan D. Nijholt A. (eds.). (2010). Brain-Computer Interaction: Applying our Minds to Human-Computer Interaction. London: Springer-Verlag
  10. Wolpaw J. R. McFarland D. J. Neat G. W. Forneris C. A. (1991). An EEG-based brain-computer interface for cursor control. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 78, 252– 259 10.1016/0013-4694(91)90040-B 1707798 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lotte, F., Larrue, F., & Mühl, C.
Affiliations
Centre Inria de l'université de Bordeaux (FR)
Corresponding author
Lotte, Fabien
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Published
2013
Volume
7
Issue
568
Pages
568-568
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974371581
Cited by
307
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 15
FWCI
14.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
mental imagery, instructional design, skill acquisition, EEG signal recognition, user feedback, training instructions, mental state recognition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review