A view to a click: Pupil size changes as input command in eyes-only human-computer interaction

Abstract In the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), affective computation extends parameterization by including implicit user information, e.g. galvanic skin responses or heart rate variability. Physiological responses are generally involuntary and measurements primarily derive emotional features to differentiate cognitive and affective states. Biofeedback applications externalize covert physiological responses and allow interference by means of simple cognitive techniques. Here, signal responses do not necessarily indicate cognitive or affective dispositions but depict a user's intention. As demonstrated recently, even pupil diameter is subject to explicit control, albeit with individually varying degrees of success. The current study explores to what extent users can transfer implicit events (here: pupil size changes) into explicit input requests. In Experiment 1 we carried out biofeedback sessions to determine individual strategies to achieve cognitive control on pupil dilation. In Experiment 2 we applied explicit pupil dilations as input commands in a visual search-and-select task. Implementation of varying thresholds ensured the involvement of different levels of cognitive effort to exceed selection criteria. Results show that a short period of freely exploring the mechanisms of action enabled most subjects to achieve cognitive control on pupil dilation, even during increased tonic activation provoked by high task load. Hence, the associated dynamics no longer define automatic events but indicate the degree of explicitness to be imposed upon implicit processing. During pupil-based object selection, a strict criterion was associated with a high cognitive load, prolonged selection times and a notable number of time-outs, whereas a soft criterion correlated with fast selections and low cognitive demands. Together with the outcome of a user survey, the current findings suggest explicit pupil size changes constitute an appropriate selection mechanism for HCI even in the context of high cognitive workload.

[1]  Roman Bednarik,et al.  What do you want to do next: a novel approach for intent prediction in gaze-based interaction , 2012, ETRA.

[2]  B. Laeng,et al.  The Eye Pupil Adjusts to Imaginary Light , 2014, Psychological science.

[3]  Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.  Evaluation of eye gaze interaction , 2000, CHI.

[4]  M Adjouadi,et al.  A practical EMG-based human-computer interface for users with motor disabilities. , 2000, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[5]  G. Prasad EYE TRACKING AND EYE-BASED HUMAN – COMPUTER INTERACTION , 2016 .

[6]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Tangible multimodal interfaces for safety-critical applications , 2004, CACM.

[7]  Harry Hochheiser,et al.  Research Methods for Human-Computer Interaction , 2008 .

[8]  Markus Loose,et al.  Towards Voluntary Pupil Control - Training Affective Strategies? , 2015, PhyCS.

[9]  Fion D Bremner,et al.  Pupillometric evaluation of the dynamics of the pupillary response to a brief light stimulus in healthy subjects. , 2012, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[10]  Christof Koch,et al.  Pupil responses allow communication in locked-in syndrome patients , 2013, Current Biology.

[11]  Perttu Hämäläinen,et al.  Voluntary pupil size change as control in eyes only interaction , 2008, ETRA.

[12]  Päivi Majaranta,et al.  Gaze Interaction and Applications of Eye Tracking - Advances in Assistive Technologies , 2011 .

[13]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale , 1996 .

[14]  Jean Lorenceau,et al.  Pupil dynamics during bistable motion perception. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[15]  Sylvain Sirois,et al.  Infant cognition: going full factorial with pupil dilation. , 2009, Developmental science.

[16]  Nicu Sebe,et al.  Multimodal Human Computer Interaction: A Survey , 2005, ICCV-HCI.

[17]  Jan Drewes,et al.  Smaller Is Better: Drift in Gaze Measurements due to Pupil Dynamics , 2014, PloS one.

[18]  Veikko Surakka,et al.  Pupil size variation as an indication of affective processing , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[19]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Emotional words impact the mind but not the body: evidence from pupillary responses. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[20]  C. Koch,et al.  Pupil dilation reflects perceptual selection and predicts subsequent stability in perceptual rivalry , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  Anke Huckauf,et al.  Better Than You Think: Head Gestures for Mid Air Input , 2015, INTERACT.

[22]  Päivi Majaranta,et al.  Communication and Text Entry by Gaze , 2012 .

[23]  B. Appelhans,et al.  Heart Rate Variability as an Index of Regulated Emotional Responding , 2006 .

[24]  Christine L. Lisetti,et al.  Using Noninvasive Wearable Computers to Recognize Human Emotions from Physiological Signals , 2004, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[25]  T. Knapen,et al.  Decision-related pupil dilation reflects upcoming choice and individual bias , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[26]  D Kahneman,et al.  Pupil Diameter and Load on Memory , 1966, Science.

[27]  Martin Tall,et al.  Computer Control by Gaze , 2012 .

[28]  Anke Huckauf,et al.  Pupil-Assisted Target Selection (PATS) , 2017, INTERACT.

[29]  S. Sirois,et al.  Pupillometry , 2012, Eye Movement Research.

[30]  M. P. Janisse Pupil size, affect and exposure frequency , 1974 .

[31]  Jonathan W. Peirce,et al.  PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[32]  Anke Huckauf,et al.  Real-Time Feedback Towards Voluntary Pupil Control in Human-Computer Interaction: Enabling Continuous Pupillary Feedback , 2014, REHAB.

[33]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  The pupillary light response reflects exogenous attention and inhibition of return. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[34]  Anke Huckauf,et al.  Pupil Size Changes as an Active Information Channel for Biofeedback Applications , 2016, Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback.

[35]  A. Huckauf,et al.  The paradoxical conditioning effect of the human pupil might be evaluative in nature , 2016 .