Potencialidades e limitações da usabilidade de aparelhos de EEG em contextos educacionais

 Alfonso García-Monge, University of Valladolid (Espanha)

 Henar Rodríguez-Navarro, University of Valladolid (Espanha)

 José-María Marbán, University of Valladolid (Espanha)

https://doi.org/10.3916/C76-2023-04

Palavras chave

Neuroeducação, eletroencefalografia, medidas neurofisiológicas, ensino fundamental, contexto educacional, estudo de caso

Resumo

Novos dispositivos de eletroencefalografia (EEG) sem fio permitem a gravação em contextos fora do laboratório. Porém, para sua utilização, muitos detalhes devem ser levados em consideração. Neste trabalho, com base em um estudo de caso instrumental com um grupo de alunos do terceiro ano do Ensino Básico, pretende-se mostrar algumas potencialidades e limitações da investigação com estes dispositivos em contextos educativos. Vários equilíbrios podem ser vistos no desenvolvimento dessas experiências: entre os interesses e possibilidades das equipes de pesquisa e das comunidades educativas; entre a distorção da vida em sala de aula e as oportunidades de colaboração entre academia e prática; e entre o orçamento e a facilidade de preparação do equipamento e a utilidade dos dados coletados. Dentre as potencialidades, encontramos o conhecimento que permitem acessar diferentes processos cognitivos e emocionais, bem como a oportunidade de aprendizagem que representa os vínculos entre investigadores e comunidades educativas. A vida em sala de aula é interrompida por esse tipo de experiência, mas isso pode acarretar um custo que facilita desenvolvimentos futuros mais integrados que podem beneficiar os processos de ensino e aprendizagem.

Referências

Akalin-Acar, Z., & Makeig, S. (2013). Effects of forward model errors on EEG source localization. Brain topography, 26(3), 378-396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-012-0274-6

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Antonenko, P., Paas, F., Grabner, R., & Van-Gog, T. (2010). Using electroencephalography to measure cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(4), 425-438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9130-y

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Basar, E., Basar-Eroglu, C., Karakas, S., & Schürmann, M. (1999). Oscillatory brain theory: A new trend in neuroscience. IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine: the quarterly magazine of the Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society, 18(3), 56-66. https://doi.org/10.1109/51.765190

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Bevilacqua, D., Davidesco, I., Wan, L., Chaloner, K., Rowland, J., Ding, M., Poeppel, D., & Dikker, S. (2019). Brain-to-brain synchrony and learning outcomes vary by student-teacher dynamics: evidence from a real-world classroom electroencephalography study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 31(3), 401-11. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01274

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Browarska, N., Kawala-Sterniuk, A., Zygarlicki, J., Podpora, M., Pelc, M., Martinek, R., & Gorzelanczyk, E.J. (2021). Comparison of smoothing filters' influence on quality of data recorded with the emotiv EPOC Flex brain-computer interface headset during audio stimulation. Brain sciences, 11(1), 98. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11010098

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Coan, J.A., & Allen, J.J. (2004). Frontal EEG asymmetry as a moderator and mediator of emotion. Biological Psychology, 67(1-2), 7-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2004.03.002

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Craik, A., He, Y., & Contreras-Vidal, J.J. (2019). Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: A review. Journal of Neural Engineering, 16(3), 031001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Dikker, S., Haegens, S., Bevilacqua, D., Davidesco, I., Wan, L., Kaggen, L., McClintock, J., Chaloner, K., Ding, M., West, T., & Poeppel, D. (2020). Morning brain: Real-world neural evidence that high school class times matter. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 15(11), 1193-1202. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa142

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Dikker, S., Wan, L., Davidesco, I., Kaggen, L., Oostrik, M., McClintock, J., Rowland, J., Michalareas, G., Van Bavel, J.J., Ding, M., & Poeppel, D. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Current Biology, 27(9), 1375-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.002

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2006). The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine Transaction.

Link Google Scholar

Grammer, J.K., Xu, K., & Lenartowicz, A. (2021). Effects of context on the neural correlates of attention in a college classroom. NPJ science of learning, 6(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00094-8

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Hajare, R., & Kadam, S. (2021). Comparative study analysis of practical EEG sensors in medical diagnoses. Global Transitions Proceedings, 2(2), 467-475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gltp.2021.08.009

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Howard-Jones, P.A., Varma, S., Ansari, D., Butterworth, B., De Smedt, B., Goswami, U., Laurillard, D., & Thomas, M.S.C. (2016). The principles and practices of educational neuroscience: Comment on Bowers (2016). Psychological Review, 123(5), 620-627. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000036

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Janssen, T.W.P., Grammer, J.K., Bleichner, M.G., Bulgarelli, C., Davidesco, I., Dikker, S., Jasi?ska, K.K., Siugzdaite, R., Vassena, E., Vatakis, A., Zion-Golumbic, E., & van Atteveldt, N. (2021). Opportunities and Limitations of Mobile Neuroimaging Technologies in Educational Neuroscience. Mind, Brain and Education, 15(4), 354-370. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12302

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Katzir, T., & Paré-Blagoev, J. (2006). Applying cognitive neuroscience research to education: The case of literacy. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4101_6

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Khedher, A.B., Jraidi, I., & Frasson, C. (2019). Tracking students’ mental engagement using EEG signals during an interaction with a virtual learning environment. Journal of Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications, 11(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4236/jilsa.2019.111001

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Krigolson, O.E., Williams, C.C., Norton, A., Hassall, C.D., & Colino, F.L. (2017). Choosing MUSE: Validation of a low-cost, portable EEG system for ERP research. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 11, 109. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00109

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Lau-Zhu, A., Lau, M.P.H., & McLoughlin, G. (2019). Mobile EEG in research on neurodevelopmental disorders: Opportunities and challenges. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 36, 100635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2019.100635

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Liu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Developing sustaining authentic partnership between MBE researchers and local schools. Mind, Brain, and Education, 15(2), 153-162. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12280

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Mason L. (2009). Bridging neuroscience and education: A two-way path is possible. Cortex, 45(4), 548-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2008.06.003

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Matusz, P.J., Dikker, S., Huth, A.G., & Perrodin, C. (2019). Are we ready for real-world neuroscience? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 31(3), 327-338. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_e_01276

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

McMahan, T., Parberry, I., & Parsons, T.D. (2015). Evaluating player task engagement and arousal using electroencephalography. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 2303-2310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.376

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Pope, A.T., Bogart, E.H., & Bartolome, D.S. (1995). Biocybernetic system evaluates indices of operator engagement in automated task. Biological Psychology, 40(1-2), 187-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(95)05116-3

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Rose, N., & Abi-Rached, J. (2014). Governing through the brain: Neuropolitics, neuroscience and subjectivity. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, 32(1), 3-23. https://doi.org/10.3167/ca.2014.320102

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Shad, E.H.T., Molinas, M., & Ytterdal, T. (2020). Impedance and noise of passive and active dry EEG electrodes: a review. IEEE Sensors Journal, 20(24), 14565-14577. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2020.3012394

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Shamay-Tsoory, S.G., & Mendelsohn, A. (2019). Real-life neuroscience: An ecological approach to brain and behavior research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(5), 841-859. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619856350

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Shkedi, A. (2004). Second?order theoretical analysis: A method for constructing theoretical explanation. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17(5), 627-646. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839042000253630

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Stake, R.E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. Guilford Publications. https://bit.ly/3J0mmNf

Link Google Scholar

Vekety, B., Logemann, A., & Takacs, Z.K. (2022). Mindfulness practice with a brain-sensing device improved cognitive functioning of elementary school children: An exploratory pilot study. Brain Sciences, 12(1), 103. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12010103

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Williams, N.S., McArthur, G.M., & Badcock, N.A. (2020a). 10 years of EPOC: A scoping review of Emotiv’s portable EEG device. BioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.202085

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Williams, N.S., McArthur, G.M., de-Wit, B., Ibrahim, G., & Badcock, N.A. (2020b). A validation of Emotiv EPOC Flex saline for EEG and ERP research. PeerJ, 8, e9713. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9713

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Williamson, B. (2018). Brain data: Scanning, scraping and sculpting the plastic learning brain through neurotechnology. Postdigital Science and Education, 1, 65-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-018-0008-5

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Xu, J., & Zhong, B. (2018). Review on portable EEG technology in educational research. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 340-349. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12314

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Xu, K., Torgrimson, S.J., Torres, R., Lenartowicz, A., & Grammer, J.K. (2022). EEG data quality in real?world settings: Examining neural correlates of attention in school?aged children. Mind, Brain, and Education, 16(3), 221-227. https://doi.org.ponton.uva.es/10.1111/mbe.12314

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Zerafa, R., Camilleri, T., Falzon, O., & Camilleri, K.P. (2018). A comparison of a broad range of EEG acquisition devices– is there any difference for SSVEP BCIs? Brain-Computer Interfaces, 5(4), 121-131 https://doi.org/10.1080/2326263X.2018.1550710

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Fundref

Crossmark

Technical information

Recebido: 28-12-2022

Revisado: 18-01-2023

Aceite: 23-02-2023

OnlineFirst: 30-05-2023

Data de publicação: 01-07-2023

Tempo de revisão do artigo: 21 dias | Tempo médio de revisão do número 76: -6 dias

Tempo de aceitação do artigo: 57 dias | Tempo médio de aceitação do número 76: 72 dias

Tempo de edição da pré-impressão: 140 dias | Tempo médio de edição pré-impressão do número 76: 155 dias

Tempo de processamento do artigo: 185 dias | Tempo médio de processamento do número 76: 200 dias

Métricas

Métricas deste artigo

Vistas: 54674

Leituras dos resumos: 53710

Descargas em PDF: 964

Métricas completas do Comunicar 76

Vistas: 469547

Leituras dos resumos: 458563

Descargas em PDF: 10984

Citado por