Neurocognitive Effects of Incentivizing Students to Improve Performance Through Repeat Attempts in Design Settings

Devanshi Shah, Elisabeth Kames, Beshoy Morkos
{"title":"Neurocognitive Effects of Incentivizing Students to Improve Performance Through Repeat Attempts in Design Settings","authors":"Devanshi Shah, Elisabeth Kames, Beshoy Morkos","doi":"10.1115/detc2021-72058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The goal of the study is to examine the effectiveness of using an incentivized “test/retest” scenario to improve participants’ performance during stressful situations. The study makes use of an electroencephalography (EEG) machine to detect participants’ stress levels during a one-minute typing test. The typing test administered was a standard, “story-typing” test. A total of 23 student participants were randomly divided into two cohorts: the control cohort and the experimental cohort. Participants were asked to complete a preliminary questionnaire self-assessing their ability to handle stressful situations. Both cohorts were then asked to complete the typing test (hereafter referred to as T1) and fill out an Emotional Stress Reaction Questionnaire (ESRQ), indicating their emotions during the typing test. The participants were then asked to complete the typing test and accompanying ESRQ a second time (hereafter referred to as T2). However, prior to the second test, the participants in the experimental cohort were told that the participant that shows the most improvement in their typing speed (measured in words per minute) will receive a $100 gift card.\n This stimulus is used to increase the already stressful situation for the experimental cohort and examine whether participants’ brain activity changes when the “retest” is incentivized. Each participant’s EEG data and heartrate were measured through the duration of the experiment and t-tests and regression analyses were used to determine if a statistically significant difference existed between cohorts (control vs. experimental) or within cohorts (T1 vs. T2).\n The results show that there were no significant changes in brain activity, emotions, or typing performance for the control group of participants (no reward offered). However, the experimental group showed an increase in EEG sensor activity; specifically, the sensors that control vision and emotion. Interestingly, the participant’s performance was found to be correlated to their emotional responses, rather than their EEG sensor data. Additionally, the experimental groups’ positive emotions were increased for the second typing test, which is incentivized. The findings lay a foundation for design settings scenarios where preparatory practices can be incorporated.","PeriodicalId":23602,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: 41st Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (CIE)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 2: 41st Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (CIE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2021-72058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The goal of the study is to examine the effectiveness of using an incentivized “test/retest” scenario to improve participants’ performance during stressful situations. The study makes use of an electroencephalography (EEG) machine to detect participants’ stress levels during a one-minute typing test. The typing test administered was a standard, “story-typing” test. A total of 23 student participants were randomly divided into two cohorts: the control cohort and the experimental cohort. Participants were asked to complete a preliminary questionnaire self-assessing their ability to handle stressful situations. Both cohorts were then asked to complete the typing test (hereafter referred to as T1) and fill out an Emotional Stress Reaction Questionnaire (ESRQ), indicating their emotions during the typing test. The participants were then asked to complete the typing test and accompanying ESRQ a second time (hereafter referred to as T2). However, prior to the second test, the participants in the experimental cohort were told that the participant that shows the most improvement in their typing speed (measured in words per minute) will receive a $100 gift card. This stimulus is used to increase the already stressful situation for the experimental cohort and examine whether participants’ brain activity changes when the “retest” is incentivized. Each participant’s EEG data and heartrate were measured through the duration of the experiment and t-tests and regression analyses were used to determine if a statistically significant difference existed between cohorts (control vs. experimental) or within cohorts (T1 vs. T2). The results show that there were no significant changes in brain activity, emotions, or typing performance for the control group of participants (no reward offered). However, the experimental group showed an increase in EEG sensor activity; specifically, the sensors that control vision and emotion. Interestingly, the participant’s performance was found to be correlated to their emotional responses, rather than their EEG sensor data. Additionally, the experimental groups’ positive emotions were increased for the second typing test, which is incentivized. The findings lay a foundation for design settings scenarios where preparatory practices can be incorporated.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在设计情境中通过重复尝试来激励学生提高表现的神经认知效应
本研究的目的是检验使用激励性的“测试/重测试”场景来提高参与者在压力情况下的表现的有效性。这项研究利用脑电图(EEG)机器来检测参与者在一分钟打字测试中的压力水平。打字测试是一个标准的“故事打字”测试。共有23名学生被随机分为两组:对照组和实验组。参与者被要求完成一份初步的问卷,自我评估他们处理压力情况的能力。然后,两组受试者都被要求完成打字测试(以下简称T1),并填写一份情绪压力反应问卷(ESRQ),显示他们在打字测试中的情绪。然后要求参与者完成第二次打字测试和随附的ESRQ(以下简称T2)。然而,在第二次测试之前,实验队列中的参与者被告知,在打字速度(以每分钟字数计算)方面进步最大的参与者将获得一张100美元的礼品卡。这种刺激是用来增加实验队列已经紧张的情况,并检查参与者的大脑活动是否在“重新测试”的激励下发生变化。通过实验持续时间测量每个参与者的脑电图数据和心率,并使用t检验和回归分析来确定队列之间(对照与实验)或队列内(T1与T2)是否存在统计学显著差异。结果显示,控制组的参与者在大脑活动、情绪或打字表现方面没有明显的变化(没有奖励)。然而,实验组的脑电图传感器活动增加;特别是控制视觉和情感的传感器。有趣的是,研究发现参与者的表现与他们的情绪反应有关,而不是与他们的脑电图传感器数据有关。此外,实验组的积极情绪在第二次类型测试中有所增加,这是有激励的。研究结果为设计场景奠定了基础,其中可以纳入准备实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Bus Factor in Conceptual System Design: Protecting a Design Process Against Major Regional and World Events Exploration of the Digital Innovation Process in the Smart Product-Service System Optimized Torque Assistance During Walking With an Idealized Hip Exoskeleton An Algorithm for Partitioning Objects Into a Cube Skeleton and Segmented Shell Covers for Parallelized Additive Manufacturing Neurocognitive Effects of Incentivizing Students to Improve Performance Through Repeat Attempts in Design Settings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1