Evaluation of BCI, EyeLink, and eye-tracking camera (Elliott et al., 2022)
Purpose: Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems are important to support communication for individuals with complex communication needs. A recent addition to AAC system options is the brain–computer interface (BCI). This study aimed to compare the clinical application of the P300 speller BCI with two more common AAC systems, the EyeLink board, and an eye-tracking camera.
Method: Ten participants without communication impairment (18–35 years of age) used each of the three AAC systems to spell three-letter words in one session. Accuracy and speed of letter selection were measured, and questionnaires were administered to evaluate usability, cognitive workload, and user preferences.
Results: The results showed that the BCI was significantly less accurate, slower, and with lower usability and higher cognitive workload compared to the eye-tracking camera and EyeLink board. Participants rated the eye-tracking camera as the most favorable AAC system on all measures.
Conclusions: The results demonstrated that while the P300 speller BCI was usable by most participants, it did not function as well as the eye-tracking camera and EyeLink board. The clinical use of the BCI is, therefore, currently difficult to justify for most individuals, particularly when considering the substantial cost and setup resourcing needed.
Supplemental Material S1. Range in accuracy and speed for words spelled per participant and system.
Elliott, C., Sutherland, D., Gerhard, D., & Theys, C. (2022). An evaluation of the P300 brain–computer interface, EyeLink board, and eye-tracking camera as augmentative and alternative communication devices. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_JSLHR-21-00572
