Identifying cognitive state from eye metrics

Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine

Volumn 78, Issue 5 II, 2007, Pages

  Marshall, Sandra P ^a,b  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b EyeTracking Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Alertness; Driving; Linear discriminant function analysis; Non linear neural network analysis; Point of gaze location; Problem solving; Pupil size; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CAMERA; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMPIRICISM; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; GAZE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; METRIC SYSTEM; NERVE CELL NETWORK; PROBLEM SOLVING; PUPIL; REAL TIME ECHOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL ACUITY;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COGNITION; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 34248149523     PISSN: 00956562     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Ahern S, Beatty J. Pupillary responses during information processing vary with Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Science 1979; 205:1289-92.
2. Backs RW, Walrath LC. Eye movement and pupillary response indices of mental workload during visual search of symbolic displays. Appl Ergon 1992; 23:243-54.
3. nd Edition;2000:142-62.
4. Bradshaw JL. Pupil size and problem solving. Q J Exp Psychol 1968; 20:116-22.
5. Carlson-Radvansky LA. Memory for relational information across eye movements. Percept Psychophys 1999; 61:919-34.
6. Dillon W R, Goldstein M. Multivariate analysis: methods and applications. New York: Wiley; 1984.
7. Gardner RM, Beltramo JS, Krinsky R. Pupillary changes during encoding, storage, and retrieval of information. Percept Mot Skills 1975; 41:951-5.
8. Gevins A, Smith M, Leong H, et al. Monitoring working memory load during computer-based tasks with EEG pattern recognition methods. Hum Factors 1998; 40:79-91.
9. Granholm E, Asarnow RF, Sarkin AJ, Dykes KL. Pupillary responses index cognitive resource limitations. Psychophysiology 1996; 33:457-61.
10. Hess EH, Polt JM. Pupil size in relation to mental activity during simple problem-solving. Science 1964; 140:1190-2.
11. st International Conference on Augmented Cognition. Las Vegas, NV, Jul 22-27 2005; Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2005: 273-82.
12. Just MA, Carpenter PA, Miyake A. Neuroindices of cognitive workload: neuroimaging, pupillometric and event-related potential studies of brain work. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 2003; 4:56-88.
13. Kahneman D. Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1973.
14. Liversedge SP, Findlay JM. Saccadic eye movements and cognition. Trends Cogn Sci 2000; 4:6-14.
15. Marshall SP. U.S. Patent No. 6,090,051. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent & Trademark Office; 2000.
16. th IEEE Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants. New York: IEEE; 2002:7.5-7.9.
17. st International Conference on Augmented Cognition. Las Vegas, NV, Jul 22-27 2005; Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2005:312-20.
18. Marshall SP. Measures of attention and cognitive effort in tactical decision making. In: Cook M, Noyes J, Masakowski Y, eds. Decision making in complex environments. Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate Publishing; 2007:321-32.
19. Marshall SP, Davis CL, Knust SR. The index of cognitive activity: estimating cognitive effort from pupil dilation. San Diego, CA: EyeTracking, Inc; 2004; Technical Report ETI-0401.
20. Maunsell J. Neuronal representations of cognitive state: reward or attention? Trends Cogn Sci 2004; 8:261-5.
21. Metalis SA, Rhoades BK, Hess EH, Petrovich SB. Pupillometric assessment of reading using materials in normal and reversed orientations. J Appl Psychol 1980; 65:359-63.
22. Mitchell T, Hutchinson R, Miculescu R, et al. Learning to decode cognitive states from brain images. Mach Learn 2004; 57:145-75.
23. Ogden T. Essential wavelets for statistical applications and data analysis. Boston: Burkhauser; 1997.
24. Schluroff M. Pupil responses to grammatical complexity of sentences. Brain Lang 1982; 17:133-45.
25. Smith M. Neural networks for statistical modelling. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1993.
26. St. John M, Kobus D, Morrison J, Schmorrow D. Overview of the DARPA Augmented Cognition Technical Integration Experiment. Int J Hum Comput Interact 2004; 17:131-49.
27. Stern J, Walrath L, Gondstein R. The endogenous eyeblink. Psychophysiology 1984; 21:22-33.
28. Van Orden K, Limbert W, Makeig S. Eye activity correlates of workload during a visuospatial memory task. Hum Factors 2001; 43:111-21.
29. Waites A, Stanislavsky A, Abbott D, Jackson G. Effect of prior cognitive state on resting state networks measured with functional connectivity. Hum Brain Map 2004; 24:59-68.
30. Wilson G, Fisher F. Cognitive task classification based upon topographic EEG data. Biol Psychol 1995; 40:239-50.
31. Wilson G, Russell C. Operator functional state classification using multiple psychophysiological features in an air traffic control task. Hum Factors 2003; 45:381-9.
32. Wong KKW, Wan WY, Kaye SB. Blinking and operating: cognition versus vision. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86:479.